[Bug 478617] New: Review Request: zsync - Partial/differential file transfer client over HTTP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: zsync - Partial/differential file transfer client over HTTP https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478617 Summary: Review Request: zsync - Partial/differential file transfer client over HTTP Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/zsync.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/zsync-0.5-1.fc9.src.rpm Project URL: http://zsync.moria.org.uk/ Description: zsync is a file transfer program. It allows you to download a file from a remote server, where you have a copy of an older version of the file on your computer already. zsync downloads only the new parts of the file. zsync uses the same algorithm as rsync. However, where rsync is designed for synchronising data from one computer to another within an organisation, zsync is designed for file distribution, with one file on a server to be distributed to thousands of downloaders. zsync requires no special server software just a web server to host the files and imposes no extra load on the server, making it ideal for large scale file distribution. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1029364 rpmlint output: [...@laptop024 i386]$ rpmlint zsync* 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [...@laptop024 SRPMS]$ rpmlint zsync-0.5-1.fc9.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478616] New: Review Request: srm - Secure file deletion
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: srm - Secure file deletion https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478616 Summary: Review Request: srm - Secure file deletion Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/srm.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/srm-1.2.9-1.fc9.src.rpm Project URL: http://srm.sourceforge.net/ Description: srm is a secure replacement for rm(1). Unlike the standard rm, it overwrites the data in the target files before unlinkg them. This prevents command-line recovery of the data by examining the raw block device. It may also help frustrate physical examination of the disk, although it's unlikely that completely protects against this type of recovery. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1029369 rpmlint output: [...@laptop024 i386]$ rpmlint srm* 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [...@laptop024 SRPMS]$ rpmlint srm-1.2.9-1.fc9.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476404] Review Request: bullet - 3D Collision Detection and Rigid Body Dynamics Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476404 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(br...@gnoll.org) --- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-02 04:35:48 EDT --- ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478620] New: Review Request: conspy - Remote control for text mode virtual consoles
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: conspy - Remote control for text mode virtual consoles https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478620 Summary: Review Request: conspy - Remote control for text mode virtual consoles Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/conspy.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/conspy-1.5-1.fc9.src.rpm Project URL: http://ace-host.stuart.id.au/russell/files/conspy/ Description: Conspy allows a (possibly remote) user to see what is displayed on a Linux virtual console, and send keystrokes to it. It is rather like VNC, but where VNC takes control of a GUI conspy takes control of a text mode virtual console. Unlike VNC, conspy does not require a server to be installed prior to being used. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1029393 rpmlint output: [...@laptop024 i386]$ rpmlint conspy* 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [...@laptop024 SRPMS]$ rpmlint conspy-1.5-1.fc9.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478620] Review Request: conspy - Remote control for text mode virtual consoles
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478620 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jussi.leht...@iki.fi Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478620] Review Request: conspy - Remote control for text mode virtual consoles
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478620 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-01-02 05:42:04 EDT --- Package adheres to guidelines. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478593] Review Request: fspy - Filesystem activity monitoring utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478593 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jussi.leht...@iki.fi Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478593] Review Request: fspy - Filesystem activity monitoring utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478593 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-01-02 05:48:09 EDT --- Package adheres to guidelines. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478620] Review Request: conspy - Remote control for text mode virtual consoles
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478620 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-01-02 06:01:25 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: conspy Short Description: Remote control for text mode virtual consoles Owners: fab Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478593] Review Request: fspy - Filesystem activity monitoring utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478593 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-01-02 06:02:56 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: fspy Short Description: Filesystem activity monitoring utility Owners: fab Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 462181] Review Request: teeworlds - Online multi-player platform 2D shooter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462181 Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||469972 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469972] Review Request: glfw - A portable framework for OpenGL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469972 Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||462181 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478628] New: Review Request: dhcping - DHCP daemon ping program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: dhcping - DHCP daemon ping program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478628 Summary: Review Request: dhcping - DHCP daemon ping program Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/dhcping.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/dhcping-1.2-1.fc9.src.rpm Project URL: http://www.mavetju.org/unix/general.php Description: Dhcping allows the system administrator to check if a remote DHCP server is still functioning. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1029498 rpmlint output: [...@laptop024 i386]$ rpmlint dhcping* 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [...@laptop024 SRPMS]$ rpmlint dhcping-1.2-1.fc9.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 433398] Review Request: synbak - Synbak Universal Backup System (first package, need sponsor)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433398 --- Comment #11 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2009-01-02 08:33:22 EDT --- It shouldn't block the package, but it can block sponsorship if the sponsor wishes it to, which I do. I like to see 1-3 practice reviews. If this package is hugely critical, an existing maintainer can take it over if the submitter is unable to become sponsored for whatever reason. I don't see anything glaring that would stop Ugo being sponsored, I just like to have some indication of understanding of the guidelines, beyond the construction of one package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 474149] Review Request: chipmunk - A rigid body physics library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474149 --- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2009-01-02 08:38:43 EDT --- The comment about *.so applies to *.so.*. I'm actually not sure how to correct the debuginfo issue, which I was hoping to find someone to assist with. I see strip mentioned a few places in the source tree, but my cmake-fu is insufficient to finding the most clueful way to remove it. What's the question? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 474149] Review Request: chipmunk - A rigid body physics library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474149 --- Comment #3 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2009-01-02 08:47:04 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) The comment about *.so applies to *.so.*. (This was my question.) I'm actually not sure how to correct the debuginfo issue, which I was hoping to find someone to assist with. I see strip mentioned a few places in the source tree, but my cmake-fu is insufficient to finding the most clueful way to remove it. Probably easiest just to remove strip wherever it's mentioned (my cmake-fu is no better than yours). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 433398] Review Request: synbak - Synbak Universal Backup System (first package, need sponsor)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433398 --- Comment #12 from Jonathan Underwood jonathan.underw...@gmail.com 2009-01-02 09:16:41 EDT --- Jon, Mamoru - thanks for your responses, I can certainly understand that point of view. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478345] Review Request: mr - A multiple repository management tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478345 --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-01-02 09:36:12 EDT --- I patched the '-l' parameter out. This way the users still use 'mr help' Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/mr.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/mr-0.35-2.fc9.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 474535] Review Request: clamtk - Easy to use front-end for ClamAV
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474535 --- Comment #7 from Jerome Soyer sai...@gmail.com 2009-01-02 09:41:06 EDT --- Hi, SPECS and SRPMS are updated. http://saispo.fedorapeople.org/clamtk-4.08-1.fc11.src.rpm http://saispo.fedorapeople.org/clamtk.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476460] Review Request: pymilter - Python interface to sendmail milter API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476460 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp --- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-02 11:19:08 EDT --- Some notes: - Please remove unneeded macros or conditions which are not related to Fedora * especially rh7 age condition is not needed * And I don't think aix4.1 part is needed. - Also please explain why you want to introduce %name, %version or %release macro (note that when you write Version: 0.9.0, the %version macro is automatically defined (and same for %name, %release) - For source tarball hosted by sourceforge.net, please follow https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Sourceforge.net - Remove Vendor item. This is automatically set when rebuiding your srpm on Fedora site. - Your srpm does not build * One reason is that BuildRequires: ed is missing http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1029717 * The second reason is that %_libdir/libmilter.a (in sendmail-devel) is not compiled with -fPIC. So either - C module support for this package should be dropped - Or you should file a bug against sendmail to compile libmilter.a with -fPIC (I guess filing a bug is better anyway) - %files -f INSTALLED_FILES in your method is not allowed on Fedora, because with this method all needed directories under python sitelib/sitearch directory are not owned correctly: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python#System_Architecture https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UnownedDirectories - We now recommend %defattr(-,root,root,-) - The directory %libdir is not owned by this package (again please refer to UnownedDirectories wiki page) - %config file should be under %_sysconfdir (/etc) and files under %_libdir should not be marked as %config. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438608] Review Request: elisa-plugins-good - Good Plugins for the Elisa Media Center
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438608 --- Comment #22 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-01-02 11:42:06 EDT --- -License: GPLv3 +# Each plugin has its license information in its setup.py +License: GPLv3 and MIT Doubtful. While the tiny gnome plugins setup.py file lists the MIT licence and Benjamin Kampmann as the author (and using a non-Fluendo address that doesn't appear anywhere else in Elisa), the main plugin code uses the GPL v3 and lists Gernot Klimscha as the author. Enough reason to believe this thing is just GPLv3. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478506] Review Request: trac-customfieldsadmin-plugin - expose ticket custom fields via web admin interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478506 Ian Weller ianwel...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ianwel...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ianwel...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Ian Weller ianwel...@gmail.com 2009-01-02 11:58:17 EDT --- I'll take this shortly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478609] Review Request: djmount - Mounts UPnP Audio/Video/Photo shares as FUSE filesystems.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478609 Felix Kaechele fe...@fetzig.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC|fe...@fetzig.org| --- Comment #1 from Felix Kaechele fe...@fetzig.org 2009-01-02 12:00:33 EDT --- Why do I always appear in the CC list on your review requests? I don't like that so much. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478640] New: Review Request: dlfcn - mingw32-dlfcn
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: dlfcn - mingw32-dlfcn https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478640 Summary: Review Request: dlfcn - mingw32-dlfcn Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ita...@ispbrasil.com.br QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://ispbrasil.com.br/dlfcn/mingw32-dlfcn.spec SRPM URL: http://ispbrasil.com.br/dlfcn/mingw32-dlfcn-r11-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: This library implements a wrapper for dlfcn, as specified in POSIX and SUS, around the dynamic link library functions found in the Windows API. (dlopen dlclose dlsym dlerror) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478640] Review Request: dlfcn - mingw32-dlfcn
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478640 Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rjo...@redhat.com Fixed In Version|rjo...@redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478640] Review Request: dlfcn - mingw32-dlfcn
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478640 Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||rjo...@redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438608] Review Request: elisa-plugins-good - Good Plugins for the Elisa Media Center
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438608 --- Comment #23 from Matthias Saou matth...@rpmforge.net 2009-01-02 12:34:17 EDT --- You're absolutely right. I'll report this so that the PKG-INFO file gets fixed. I'm sure it was different before, the field was wrong because the files were cleaned up recently. But I've now double checked and changed to plain GPLv3. Fixed package available. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478470] Review Request: mrpt - The Mobile Robot Programming Toolkit (MRPT)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478470
Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
--- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-02
12:45:43 EDT ---
Some notes
- First of all, your package does not build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1029717
So I just check your spec file
- After some long discussion, many Fedora contributors say that
including the package name itself in its Summary is redundant.
- By the way, is it really needed that the most part of %description
is repeated on every subpackage?
- For source tarball:
I cannot see rev.714 tarball on the URL. Also your versioning
of this srpm is not proper for Fedora. Please refer to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Using_Revision_Control
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#SnapshotPackages
! Also please consider to use %{?dist} tag:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/DistTag
- Please remove Packager item. This is automatically defined when
rebuilding this srpm on Fedora site.
- %package -n mrpt-ann can simply be replaced by %package ann (same
for other subpackages)
- Usually the dependencies between packages created from the same srpm
must be EVR (Epoch:Version:Release) specific, not just name specific
(i.e. usually should have Requires: %{name}-mrpt = %{version}-%{release},
for example).
- Packages containing pkgconfig .pc file must have Requires: pkgconfig
(ref:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines )
- Currently I am not sure if koji supports noarch subpackages build
when main package is arch dependent, however for now I doubt this
(and other packages don't this so).
So please remove BuildArch: noarch for -doc subpackage.
- Make build.log more verbose (to check if compiler options are correctly
honored, for example). make VERBOSE=1 seems to work for this package
(ref:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/cmake )
- Pleae call make documentation_html at %build stage
(By the way, why is it needed to call make %?_smp_mflags at %install ?)
- Please take care of directory ownership issue.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UnownedDirectories
- This package must not own %{_datadir}/applications/,
%{_libdir}/pkgconfig or so
- Instead %_datadir/%name is not owned by any packages
- %post -n mrpt-apps -p '/usr/bin/update-mime-database /usr/share/mime'
This cannot be done (you can simply think that this method can be
used only for calling /sbin/ldconfig with no other additional
scripts)
- For %changelog format, please follow
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Changelogs
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453395] Review Request: libmapi - OpenChange: Microsoft Exchange access with native protocols
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453395 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Blocks|177841 | Flag|fedora-review+ | --- Comment #14 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-02 12:59:22 EDT --- (resetting all) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438806] Review Request: php-pear-HTTP-Header - OO interface to modify and handle HTTP headers and status codes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438806 --- Comment #8 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com 2009-01-02 13:10:20 EDT --- ping ?? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478609] Review Request: djmount - Mounts UPnP Audio/Video/Photo shares as FUSE filesystems.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478609 --- Comment #2 from Avi Alkalay a...@unix.sh 2009-01-02 13:38:06 EDT --- Felix, I think thats because I created this report copying another one that you were probably listed in the CC. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478345] Review Request: mr - A multiple repository management tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478345 Sven Lankes s...@lank.es changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|s...@lank.es -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477750] Review Request: Ogmtools - Tools for Ogg media streams
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477750 Matthias Saou matth...@rpmforge.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||matth...@rpmforge.net AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|matth...@rpmforge.net Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Matthias Saou matth...@rpmforge.net 2009-01-02 13:54:05 EDT --- I'll review this one :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459944] Review Request: pfstools - Programs for handling high-dynamic range images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459944 Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #22 from Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com 2009-01-02 13:58:09 EDT --- I've added the one BuildRequres. This means I should be ready to uild it for the distribution. Thanks for the review. http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools-1.6.5-5.fc10.src.rpm http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459944] Review Request: pfstools - Programs for handling high-dynamic range images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459944 --- Comment #23 from Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com 2009-01-02 14:00:06 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: pfstools Short Description: Programs for handling high-dynamic range images Owners: drep...@redhat.com Branches: F-9 F-10 F-11 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478345] Review Request: mr - A multiple repository management tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478345
Sven Lankes s...@lank.es changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Sven Lankes s...@lank.es 2009-01-02 14:07:04 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: f11/i386
[x] Rpmlint output: all clean
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type:GPLv2+
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
SHA1SUM of package: f85d3b5fe50a2b2df278a143892e5d81967eb9d5
mr_0.35.tar.gz
[-] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are
listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[-] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: f10/i386
[-] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on:
[x] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
*** APPROVED ***
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477750] Review Request: Ogmtools - Tools for Ogg media streams
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477750 --- Comment #3 from Matthias Saou matth...@rpmforge.net 2009-01-02 14:10:11 EDT --- Initial comment about the licensing (formal review pending) : The Licensing wiki page states that A GPL or LGPL licensed package that lacks any statement of what version that it's licensed under in the source code/program output/accompanying docs is technically licensed under *any* version of the GPL or LGPL, not just the version in whatever COPYING file they include., so since here the sources contain only Distributed under the GPL, the License: field should be GPL+ and not GPLv2. Note that lots of files state Based on Xiph.org's 'oggmerge' found in their CVS repository, but that doesn't seem to be a problem, as it has exactly the same plain Distributed under the GPL statement. See : https://trac.xiph.org/browser/trunk/ogg-tools/oggmerge/oggmerge.c All of the rest does look fine. Just that ChangeLog which could be converted to UTF-8, though I wouldn't consider that a blocker (I would if it was the main README for instance). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438608] Review Request: elisa-plugins-good - Good Plugins for the Elisa Media Center
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438608 --- Comment #24 from Valent Turkovic valent.turko...@gmail.com 2009-01-02 14:41:33 EDT --- What is your estimated time frame of when working version of elisa will be in Fedora 10 repos? Is it few days, weeks or months? I'm just not a developer so I can't keep track of your conversations but would like to test it as soon as it gets into testing Fedora repos. Thank you very much for your hard work! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468516] Review Request: verilator - A fast simulator of synthesizable Verilog HDL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468516 --- Comment #17 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-01-02 14:45:41 EDT --- Lane, at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/11/Schedule is the schedule for F11. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468516] Review Request: verilator - A fast simulator of synthesizable Verilog HDL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468516 --- Comment #16 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-01-02 14:43:26 EDT --- The suggestion was to package the example files (i.e. the content of /usr/share/verilator/examples), which needed two steps - move the folder /usr/share/verilator/examples directly below $BUILDROOT - use the %doc directive to include the above mentioned folder -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478345] Review Request: mr - A multiple repository management tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478345 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-01-02 14:45:10 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mr Short Description: A multiple repository management tool Owners: fab Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225865] Merge Review: gstreamer-plugins-base
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225865 Debarshi Ray debarshi@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||478651 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226048] Merge Review: libtheora
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226048 Debarshi Ray debarshi@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||478651 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226048] Merge Review: libtheora
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226048 --- Comment #7 from Debarshi Ray debarshi@gmail.com 2009-01-02 15:11:08 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Re-opening the review. Introducing an Epoch should be delayed as long as it makes sense. We do need to fix this now. See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/478651 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226048] Merge Review: libtheora
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226048 Debarshi Ray debarshi@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED CC||debarshi@gmail.com Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461429] Review Request: zsync - Incremental file-transfer program without special server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461429 --- Comment #7 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-01-02 15:25:43 EDT --- Hopefully Ian will react soon, otherwise we might as well close this bug and reopen #478617 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461429] Review Request: zsync - Incremental file-transfer program without special server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461429 manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fab...@bernewireless.net --- Comment #6 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-01-02 15:23:24 EDT --- *** Bug 478617 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478617] Review Request: zsync - Partial/differential file transfer client over HTTP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478617 manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-01-02 15:23:24 EDT --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 461429 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468516] Review Request: verilator - A fast simulator of synthesizable Verilog HDL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468516 --- Comment #18 from Lane dir...@gmail.com 2009-01-02 15:23:18 EDT --- I updated the spec file to move the examples from the data directory to the doc directory. You can download the updates from: Spec URL: http://brooks.nu/~lane/verilator.spec SRPM URL: http://brooks.nu/~lane/verilator-3.681-2.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461484] Review Request: twin - Textmode window environment for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461484 --- Comment #7 from Milos Jakubicek xja...@fi.muni.cz 2009-01-02 15:37:05 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) OK, just to let you know I didn't forget about this: ref: gpm: waiting for solution. Fixed, this was plain wrong on my side. docs: excellent, thanks twmapscrn: of course, as long as you make sure all the deps are required/buildrequired. license: waiting for advices Waiting for upstream reaction -- still:( I finally succeeded to contact the author (e-mail address didn't work anymore), today I sent the second request to fix the license problem, I hope I'll get an answer (soon). Thank you for your patience. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477732] Review Request: xfconf - Hierarchical configuration system for Xfce
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477732 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo? --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-02 15:38:35 EDT --- Hey Marcela. Any chance to look over the comments and spec from comment #5? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 --- Comment #3 from Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com 2009-01-02 15:56:00 EDT --- I've updated the files. The BuildRequires are added and I've updated to the most recent release. Note that in this update upstream included two files with questionable (at best) copyright. I've added a patch to not rely on those files, they are not used. Do they have to be removed from the .src.rpm? I have deliberately not added the complete URL. This would defeat the mirroring sourceforge is doing. It would be a bad idea to insist on this. Unfortunately sourceforge doesn't provide a nice URL interface to packages. Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfscalibration.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfscalibration-1.4-1.fc10.src.rpm Please review again. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225865] Merge Review: gstreamer-plugins-base
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225865 Bug 225865 depends on bug 478651, which changed state. Bug 478651 Summary: Violates package naming guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478651 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226048] Merge Review: libtheora
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226048 Bug 226048 depends on bug 478651, which changed state. Bug 478651 Summary: Violates package naming guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478651 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478429] Review Request: tinc - A virtual private network daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478429 Till Maas opensou...@till.name changed: What|Removed |Added CC||opensou...@till.name --- Comment #1 from Till Maas opensou...@till.name 2009-01-02 16:30:44 EDT --- (In reply to comment #0) This package fails at the moment on ppc. - configure: error: OpenSSL libraries not found. Is this a bug in the OpenSSL package? What is the plan to fix this? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459944] Review Request: pfstools - Programs for handling high-dynamic range images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459944 --- Comment #24 from Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com 2009-01-02 16:32:09 EDT --- I've updated to the most recent upstream release: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools-1.7.0-1.fc10.src.rpm http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools.spec One more subpackage is build and I added the appropriate new BuildRequires. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473412] Review Request: kopete-cryptography - Encrypts and signs messages in Kopete using the OpenPGP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473412 --- Comment #29 from Till Maas opensou...@till.name 2009-01-02 16:38:11 EDT --- What is the status here? I noticed that kdenetwork-4.1.3-2 was pushed to F9 testing, but not to F10. According to comment #27, it seems that there is no need for the update in F9, but only in F10. Also there was no reply to my comment #28. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478655] New: Review Request: sion - GIO/GVFS management application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: sion - GIO/GVFS management application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478655 Summary: Review Request: sion - GIO/GVFS management application Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ke...@tummy.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.scrye.com/~kevin/fedora/sion/sion.spec SRPM URL: http://www.scrye.com/~kevin/fedora/sion/sion-0.1.0-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: A frontend to easily manage connections to remote filesystems using GIO/GVFS. It allows you to quickly connect/mount a remote filesystem and manage bookmarks of such. rpmlint is silent on the package. rawhide scratch build at: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1029974 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478593] Review Request: fspy - Filesystem activity monitoring utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478593 David Timms dti...@iinet.net.au changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dti...@iinet.net.au --- Comment #3 from David Timms dti...@iinet.net.au 2009-01-02 17:05:17 EDT --- Really minor suggestions: - since the spec mostly has a double blank line between sections, you should do that also between build and install sections. - The description could be improved (spelling and case at least). Perhaps: Description: fspy is an easy to use linux filesystem activity monitoring tool. It is is small, fast and handles system resources conservatively. Features include being able to apply filters, use diffing and set a custom output format in order to achieve the best results. - License: Since neither the web site nor readme contains a license statement, perhaps this could be requested of the upstream (since each source file includes a GPLv2+ header). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478655] Review Request: sion - GIO/GVFS management application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478655 Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||fed...@christoph-wickert.de AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@christoph-wickert.de Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478659] New: Review Request: xfce4-screensooter - Screenshot utility for the Xfce desktop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: xfce4-screensooter - Screenshot utility for the Xfce desktop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478659 Summary: Review Request: xfce4-screensooter - Screenshot utility for the Xfce desktop Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fed...@christoph-wickert.de QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/xfce4-screenshooter.spec SRPM URL: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/xfce4-screenshooter-1.4.90.0-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: The Xfce Screenshooter utility allows you to capture the entire screen, the active window or a selected region. You can set the delay that elapses before the screenshot is taken and the action that will be done with the screenshot: save it to a PNG file, copy it to the clipboard, or open it using another application. Note: Successor of the xfce4-screenshooter-plugin (bug # 179202). Basically this is a re-review because the package has been renamed and split into standalone app and panel plugin. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459945] Review Request: pfstmo - PFS tone mapping operators
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459945 --- Comment #2 from Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com 2009-01-02 18:34:27 EDT --- I've updated the code to the latest upstream version. Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstmo.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstmo-1.3.2-1.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468462] Review Request: sbackup - Simple Backup Suite for desktop use
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468462 Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||fed...@christoph-wickert.de AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@christoph-wickert.de Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478660] New: Review Request: dateshift - A date/time test tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: dateshift - A date/time test tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478660 Summary: Review Request: dateshift - A date/time test tool Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/dateshift.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/dateshift-1.1-1.fc9.src.rpm Project URL: http://www.hornby.dsl.pipex.com/dateshift/ Description: Dateshift is a tool for shifting date/time. In particular it allows a process or set of process to run with a different clock setting, without having to change the system clock. This is useful because changing the system clock requires root privilege and is inconvenient on shared machines. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1030082 rpmlint output: [...@laptop024 i386]$ rpmlint dateshift* dateshift.i386: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libdsintercept.so.0.0.0 e...@glibc_2.0 dateshift-devel.i386: W: no-documentation 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. [...@laptop024 SRPMS]$ rpmlint dateshift-1.1-1.fc9.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. I reported to upstream about the rpmlint warning. But so far I have no answer. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478659] Review Request: xfce4-screenshooter - Screenshot utility for the Xfce desktop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478659 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ke...@tummy.com Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |xfce4-screensooter -|xfce4-screenshooter - |Screenshot utility for the |Screenshot utility for the |Xfce desktop|Xfce desktop Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-02 18:46:53 EDT --- I'll review this. Look for a full review later tonight or this weekend. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478662] New: Review Request: dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 Summary: Review Request: dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: s...@lank.es QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SPECS/dustismo.spec SRPM URL: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SRPM/dustismo-fonts-20030207-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Dustismo is a font by Dustin Norlander with serif and sans-serif versions Upstream seems pretty much dead - none of the urls work. Dustismo is needed by the kdeedu package which currently ships with the font embedded (see bz #477406). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478655] Review Request: sion - GIO/GVFS management application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478655
Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de 2009-01-02
19:53:26 EDT ---
REVIEW FOR 8d0af5eecdb1a646e0f5ecce75be5648 sion-0.1.0-1.fc11.src.rpm
OK - MUST: $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/sion-*
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
OK - MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
OK - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
OK - MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
OK - MUST: The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license (GPLv2) and
meets the Licensing Guidelines.
FIX - MUST: The License field in the package spec does not match the actual
license. All the headers read:
* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
* the Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License.
This is GPLv2 only, AFIAR from my plugins Enrico usually uses this
OK - MUST: The license file from the source package is included in %doc.
OK - MUST: The spec file is in American English.
NOTE - MUST: The spec file for the is legible, but I would prefer line brakes
in the configure statements
OK - MUST: The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source by
MD5 d38ba0f6468793f1860bbc6a5797916d
OK - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on all
arches
OK - MUST: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
OK - MUST: The spec file handles locales properly with the %find_lang macro.
OK - MUST: The package is not designed to be relocatable
OK - MUST: The package owns all directories that it creates.
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing.
OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly. Every %files section includes
a %defattr(...) line.
OK - MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
OK - MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines .
OK - MUST: The package contains code
OK - MUST: No large documentation files for a -doc subpackage
OK - MUST: Files included as %doc do not affect the runtime of the application.
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives.
NOTE - MUST: The Package contains a GUI application and includes a
%{name}.desktop file, and that file is properly installed with
desktop-file-install in the %install section. But AFIAK we don't use vendor any
longer for new packages. See:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/TomCallaway/DesktopFileVendor
OK - MUST: The packages does not own files or directories already owned by
other packages.
OK - MUST: At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (
or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ).
OK - MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
SHOULD Items:
OK - SHOULD: The package builds in mock.
OK - SHOULD: The package compiles and builds into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
OK - SHOULD: The package functions as described.
OK - SHOULD: The package has no file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin
OK - SHOULD: Timestamp of Source matches
If you fix the License tag you can consider this package APPROVED. The rest is
up to you.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478662] Review Request: dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams ivazquez...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ivazquez...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams ivazquez...@gmail.com 2009-01-02 20:07:08 EDT --- GPLv2+ is a bad license for fonts in Fedora. I recommend you find a suitable replacement. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal_considerations_for_fonts -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ke...@tummy.com --- Comment #4 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-02 20:16:44 EDT --- Not a review, but some comments: For the first, you should probibly exclude them if Fedora can't distribute them at all. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#When_Upstream_uses_Prohibited_Code You can (and should) specify a full URL for sourceforge hosted projects. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Sourceforge.net -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459946] Review Request: pfscalibration - Scripts and programs for photometric calibration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459946 --- Comment #5 from Ulrich Drepper drep...@redhat.com 2009-01-02 20:41:56 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) For the first, you should probibly exclude them if Fedora can't distribute them at all. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#When_Upstream_uses_Prohibited_Code wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Sourceforge.net It's not that bad. The code is simply copyrighted, you need a license to use it. From what that page syas there is no reason to modify the tarball and exclude the file. The binaries are not tainted. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472060] Review Request: mumbles - growl like notification system for gnome
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472060
--- Comment #12 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de
2009-01-02 21:13:02 EDT ---
Sorry it took so long, holydays, etc...
REVIEW for 7d6514c04ab3d2914b6cf971dba30c2c mumbles-0.4-5.fc10.src.rpm
OK - MUST:
$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/mumbles-0.4-5.fc11.*
mumbles.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/mumbles/GrowlNetwork.py 0644
mumbles.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/mumbles/Mumbles.py 0644
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings.
because this python, save to ignore
OK - MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
OK - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
FIX - MUST: The package does not meet the Packaging Guidelines:
- IMO Group tag should be 'User Interface/Desktops' instead of 'System
Environment/Libraries'
- Timestamp of Source0 does not match, see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Timestamps
OK - MUST: The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license (GPLv2) and
meets the Licensing Guidelines. Note: GrowlNetwork.py is BSD
OK - MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual
license.
OK - MUST: The license file from the source package is included in %doc.
OK - MUST: The spec file is in American English.
OK - MUST: The spec file for the is legible.
OK - MUST: The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source by
MD5 a6b24223dc23e5022332586ffc454e84
OK - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on
i386
N/A - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
OK - MUST: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
N/A - MUST: The spec file handles locales properly with the %find_lang macro.
N/A - MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared
library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths,
must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [10]
N/A - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
OK - MUST: The package owns all directories that it creates.
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing.
OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly. The %files section includes a
%defattr(...) line.
OK - MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot}.
OK - MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines .
OK - MUST: The package contains code.
N/A - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not
restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity)
OK - MUST: Files included as %doc do not affect the runtime of the application.
N/A - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
N/A - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
N/A - MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
(for directory ownership and usability).
N/A - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.
N/A - MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives.
FIX - MUST: The Package contains a GUI application and includes a
%{name}.desktop file, and that file is properly installed with
desktop-file-install in the %install section. But the file needs to be fixed,
the category Application is obsolete according to latest fdo specs, see
http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/latest/apa.html
Add --remove-category=Application to desktop-file-install
You should also add-category=Gnome
OK - MUST: The packages does not own files or directories already owned by
other packages.
OK - MUST: At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot}.
OK - MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
N/A - SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
N/A - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
OK - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. See
MockTricks
[Bug 472060] Review Request: mumbles - growl like notification system for gnome
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472060 --- Comment #13 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de 2009-01-02 21:25:08 EDT --- Regarding the desktop file: You should also add. Seem like you already remove 'Application' from Categories, seems like my browser had the file still cached, sorry. You could also add '--add-category=GNOME;GTK' -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472060] Review Request: mumbles - growl like notification system for gnome
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472060 --- Comment #14 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de 2009-01-02 21:38:40 EDT --- (Sorry, hit the Commit button to fast) The package also 'Requires: dbus', because dbus-python only pulls in dbus-libs, not dbus itself. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472060] Review Request: mumbles - growl like notification system for gnome
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472060
--- Comment #15 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de
2009-01-02 22:08:26 EDT ---
You should consider adding mumbles to the default Gnome and Xfce sessions:
desktop-file-install \
--dir %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/xdg/autostart \
--copy-name-to-generic-name \
--remove-category=Application \
--add-category=GNOME;GTK;TrayIcon; \
--add-only-show-in=GNOME;XFCE; \
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 464014] Review Request: findbugs - Find bugs in Java code
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464014 --- Comment #2 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com 2009-01-03 00:21:04 EDT --- Updated to version 1.3.7: Spec URL: http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/findbugs/findbugs.spec SRPM URL: http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/findbugs/findbugs-1.3.7-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 464013] Review Request: findbugs-bcel - Byte Code Engineering Library with findbugs extensions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464013 --- Comment #10 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com 2009-01-03 00:20:17 EDT --- Updated for findbugs 1.3.7: http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/findbugs-bcel/findbugs-bcel.spec http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/findbugs-bcel/findbugs-bcel-5.2-1.3.7.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 464016] Review Request: eclipse-findbugs - Eclipse plugin for FindBugs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464016 --- Comment #2 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com 2009-01-03 00:21:41 EDT --- Updated to version 1.3.7: http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-findbugs/eclipse-findbugs.spec http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-findbugs/eclipse-findbugs-1.3.7-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478659] Review Request: xfce4-screenshooter - Screenshot utility for the Xfce desktop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478659 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-03 01:04:17 EDT --- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (GPLv2+) OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: 1bcd5d2e7428c7ced039be87dfa30d74 xfce4-screenshooter-1.4.90.0.tar.gz 1bcd5d2e7428c7ced039be87dfa30d74 xfce4-screenshooter-1.4.90.0.tar.gz.orig OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Spec handles locales/find_lang OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install OK - Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. See below - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend. OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version Issues: 1. rpmlint says: xfce4-screenshooter-plugin.x86_64: W: no-documentation which can be ignored. 2. I see you have --add-only-show-in=XFCE in the desktop file. Is that really intended? Doesn't that lessen the need for splitting out the plugin, if it's only going to be used in Xfce anyhow? On the other hand, other DE's have their own screenshot applications, so perhaps thats adding too much clutter. In any case, up to you. Neither of these are blockers, so this package is APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478655] Review Request: sion - GIO/GVFS management application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478655 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-03 01:10:31 EDT --- Oops. I looked at all the files and saw that it was GPLv2, but for some reason put GPLv2+ in the spec. ;( The date in the changelog is wrong, it still 2008 :) That's the second time I have done that today. ;( Thanks for the review and spotting that. Will fix on import. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: sion Short Description: GIO/GVFS management application Owners: kevin Branches: devel F-10 F-9 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226426] Merge Review: spamassassin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226426 --- Comment #16 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-03 01:13:41 EDT --- I have no idea why it happened, and personally I don't see any issue with those files being 444 instead of 644. Perhaps someone from the perl list will enlighten us? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478668] New: Review Request: lxmusic - Lightweight XMMS2 client with simple user interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: lxmusic - Lightweight XMMS2 client with simple user interface https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478668 Summary: Review Request: lxmusic - Lightweight XMMS2 client with simple user interface Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fed...@christoph-wickert.de QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/lxmusic.spec SRPM URL: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/lxmusic-0.2.3-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: LXMusic is a very simple gtk+ XMMS2 client written in pure C. It has very few functionality, and can do nothing more than play the music. The UI is very clean and simple. This is currently aimed to be used as the default music player of LXDE (Lightweight X11 Desktop Environment) project. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472639] Review Request: Scilab - Numerical Analysis toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472639 --- Comment #15 from D Haley my...@yahoo.com 2009-01-03 01:21:41 EDT --- Yet another update. This mainly just cleans up the 5.0.3 spec file. SPEC URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/scilab-5.0.3-2.spec SRPM URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/scilab-5.0.3-2.fc10.src.rpm Changelog: * Sat Jan 03 2009 mycae(a!t)yahoo.com 5.0.3-2 - Fix up Requires BuildRequires - Work around static lib installation (disable static libs issue?) - Trash zero length files during install - Added missing ldconfig in post/postun - Fix up file ownership to prevent duplicate owners - Fix up file permissions (644-755) on executable scripts - Fix so .so files are in -devel, .so.* are in main I still can't track down the gluegen plotting problems. Checking scilab's classpath.xml everything looks good (in the console session below there are no no such file errors). If anyone can help I would really appreciate it. Similarly I cannot work out why the help files are not located. This is probably due to the fact that I don't understand how scilab's help system functions. Scilab errors: Exception in thread AWT-EventQueue-0 java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: Could not initialize class com.sun.opengl.impl.x11.X11GLDrawableFactory at java.lang.Class.forName0(Native Method) at java.lang.Class.forName(Class.java:186) Exception in thread AWT-EventQueue-0 java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: no gluegen-rt in java.library.path at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadLibrary(ClassLoader.java:1698) at java.lang.Runtime.loadLibrary0(Runtime.java:840) at java.lang.System.loadLibrary(System.java:1047) Console session: $ `cat $SCI/etc/classpath.xml | grep .jar |sed 's/path value=//' | sed 's!/!!' | sed 's/\ .*//' | sed 's/\//' | sed s/disable.*// ` | sed 's!$SCILAB!/home/makerpm/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/usr/share/scilab/!g' tmp ls -l `cat tmp` -rw-r--r-- 1 makerpm makerpm 2088 2009-01-03 12:28 /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/usr/share/scilab//modules/action_binding/jar/org.scilab.modules.action_binding.jar -rw-r--r-- 1 makerpm makerpm 2130 2009-01-03 12:28 /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/usr/share/scilab//modules/completion/jar/org.scilab.modules.completion.jar -rw-r--r-- 1 makerpm makerpm 42847 2009-01-03 12:28 /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/usr/share/scilab//modules/console/jar/org.scilab.modules.console.jar -rw-r--r-- 1 makerpm makerpm 25234 2009-01-03 12:28 /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/usr/share/scilab//modules/graphic_export/jar/org.scilab.modules.graphic_export.jar -rw-r--r-- 1 makerpm makerpm 273140 2009-01-03 12:28 /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/usr/share/scilab//modules/gui/jar/org.scilab.modules.gui.jar -rw-r--r-- 1 makerpm makerpm 23631 2009-01-03 12:28 /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/usr/share/scilab//modules/helptools/jar/org.scilab.modules.helptools.jar -rw-r--r-- 1 makerpm makerpm 2909 2009-01-03 12:28 /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/usr/share/scilab//modules/history_manager/jar/org.scilab.modules.history_manager.jar -rw-r--r-- 1 makerpm makerpm 13272 2009-01-03 12:28 /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/usr/share/scilab//modules/javasci/jar/javasci.jar -rw-r--r-- 1 makerpm makerpm 6900 2009-01-03 12:28 /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/usr/share/scilab//modules/jvm/jar/org.scilab.modules.jvm.jar -rw-r--r-- 1 makerpm makerpm 1944 2009-01-03 12:28 /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/usr/share/scilab//modules/localization/jar/org.scilab.modules.localization.jar -rw-r--r-- 1 makerpm makerpm 152263 2009-01-03 12:28 /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/usr/share/scilab//modules/renderer/jar/org.scilab.modules.renderer.jar -rw-r--r-- 1 makerpm makerpm 1979 2009-01-03 12:28 /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/usr/share/scilab//modules/shell/jar/org.scilab.modules.shell.jar -rw-r--r-- 1 rootroot478024 2008-12-21 22:26 /usr/lib/flexdock-0.5.1.jar lrwxrwxrwx 1 rootroot26 2008-12-22 00:54 /usr/share/java//avalon-framework.jar - avalon-framework-4.1.4.jar lrwxrwxrwx 1 rootroot17 2008-12-22 00:53 /usr/share/java//batik-all.jar - batik-all-1.7.jar lrwxrwxrwx 1 rootroot25 2008-12-22 00:28 /usr/share/java//commons-logging.jar - commons-logging-1.0.4.jar lrwxrwxrwx 1 rootroot12 2008-12-22 00:54 /usr/share/java//fop.jar - fop-0.95.jar lrwxrwxrwx 1 rootroot20 2008-11-23 18:06 /usr/share/java//gluegen-rt.jar - gluegen-rt-1.1.1.jar lrwxrwxrwx 1 rootroot28 2008-12-21 19:30 /usr/share/java//jakarta-commons-io.jar - jakarta-commons-io-1.3.2.jar lrwxrwxrwx 1 rootroot20 2008-11-22 16:54 /usr/share/java//javahelp2.jar - javahelp2-2.0.05.jar lrwxrwxrwx 1 rootroot22 2008-12-22 01:10 /usr/share/java//jeuclid-core.jar - jeuclid-core-3.1.3.jar lrwxrwxrwx 1 rootroot24 2008-11-01 12:33 /usr/share/java//jgoodies-looks.jar - jgoodies-looks-2.1.4.jar lrwxrwxrwx 1 rootroot14
[Bug 478659] Review Request: xfce4-screenshooter - Screenshot utility for the Xfce desktop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478659 Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de 2009-01-03 01:36:02 EDT --- Regarding the OnlyShowIn: Both Gnome and KDE already have Screenshot Utilities, so I'm maybe better of using NotShowIn=GNOME;KDE; New Package CVS Request === Package Name: xfce4-screenshooter Short Description: Screenshot utility for the Xfce desktop Owners: cwickert Branches: F-10 InitialCC: (I don't think that renaming package in F-9 makes sense.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
