[Bug 477953] Review Request: podcatcher - Armangil's podcast client for the command line
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=477953 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-15 03:09:36 EDT --- Okay, thanks. -- 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 478877] Review Request: python-progressbar - Text progressbar library for python
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=478877 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #14 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-15 03:10:31 EDT --- Okay, thanks. -- 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 467397] Review Request: mingw32-libpng - MinGW Windows Libpng 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=467397 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-15 04:33:34 EDT --- mingw32-libpng-1.2.34-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw32-libpng-1.2.34-2.fc10 -- 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 452584] Review Request: mldonkey - Client for several P2P networks
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=452584 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski r...@greysector.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|182235 | Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #31 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski r...@greysector.net 2009-01-15 04:58:32 EDT --- (In reply to comment #28) I guess I shouldn't have set review flag to + before the legal issues are resolved. According to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/FAQ#What_about_the_RSA_license_on_their_MD5_implementation.3F_Isn.27t_that_GPL-incompatible.3F (thanks tibbs!) there's no issue, but upstream should be asked to remove RSA's licence and keep the copyright notice only. Lifting FE-Legal, so please go ahead and import this 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 474983] Review Request: TVAnytimeAPI - A java API for parsing, manipulating and creating TV-Anytime metadata
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=474983 --- Comment #12 from Sandro Mathys s...@sandro-mathys.ch 2009-01-15 05:11:43 EDT --- Spec URL: http://red.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/TVAnytimeAPI.spec SRPM URL: http://red.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/TVAnytimeAPI-1.3-3.fc11.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 475897] Review Request: ncmpcpp - Clone of ncmpc with new features and written in C++
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=475897 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 05:58:09 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) ... checking whether to build static libraries... yes ... There are no .a files created. I only looked at the single line and not at the build process as a whole. Sorry for the noise. Well, yeah, that could save me some troubles in the future. http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/ncmpcpp/ncmpcpp.spec http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/ncmpcpp/ncmpcpp-0.2.5-4.fc10.src.rpm * Thu Jan 15 2009 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 0.2.5-4 - disable building static archives -- Thanks Fabian review! -- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: ncmpcpp Short Description: Clone of ncmpc with new features and written in C++ Owners: mnowak Branches: F-9 F-10 -- 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 479953] Review Request: gtksourceviewmm - C++ wrapper for the gtksourceview widget 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=479953 --- Comment #2 from Denis Leroy de...@poolshark.org 2009-01-15 06:04:36 EDT --- Yikes, fixed thanks! Group tag should be Development/Libraries Hmm, are you certain ? I'm using the same Group (for the libraries) as is used for all other glib/gtk packages, such as glib2, gtk2, gtkmm24, etc... Spec URL: http://www.poolshark.org/src/gtksourceviewmm.spec SRPM URL: http://www.poolshark.org/src/gtksourceviewmm-2.2.0-2.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 469553] Review Request: asleap - Recovering tool for weak LEAP and PPTP passwords
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=469553 --- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-01-15 06:27:32 EDT --- Thanks Tom for the legal stuff. So far there is no answer from upstream. I will wait some more days and resend the message. -- 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 479603] Review Request: shcov - A gcov and lcov coverage test tool for bourne shell / bash scripts
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=479603 Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mmasl...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 06:34:56 EDT --- OK source files match upstream: 55772762ae9822983099d2edc89c2ead OK package meets naming and versioning guidelines. OK specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. OK dist tag is present. OK build root is correct. OK license field matches the actual license. OK license is open source-compatible. License text not included upstream. OK latest version is being packaged. OK BuildRequires are proper. OK %clean is present. OK package builds in mock (Rawhide/x86_64). OK debuginfo package isn't need. OK rpmlint is silent. OK final provides and requires look sane. OK no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. OK owns the directories it creates. OK no duplicates in %files. OK file permissions are appropriate. OK no scriptlets present. OK code, not content. OK documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. OK no headers. OK no pkgconfig files. OK no libtool .la droppings. ACCEPT -- 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 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
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=480103
Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fab...@bernewireless.net
--- Comment #1 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-01-15
06:54:17 EDT ---
Just some quick comments on your spec file.
- There is no need for '%define name bnIRC' and '%define version 1.1.1' because
'Name:' and 'Version:' can be used as macros later.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CreatingPackageHowTo#Macros
- Source0: should point to the upstream location of the tarball.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL
- 'BuildRoot:' please use on of the examples in the guidelines
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
- Your %description is too long. Didn't rpmlint complain about this?
- Please preserve the time stamps in your %install section if possible
make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} INSTALL=install -p
- You are using '%post -p /sbin/ldconfig' and '%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig'.
Aren't 'Requires(post): /sbin/ldconfig' and 'Requires(postun):
/sbin/ldconfig' missing?
- Please use one of the formating style from the guidelines for your %changelog
entry
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 479603] Review Request: shcov - A gcov and lcov coverage test tool for bourne shell / bash scripts
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=479603 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-01-15 07:04:35 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: shcov Short Description: A gcov and lcov coverage test tool for bourne shell / bash scripts 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 480146] New: Review Request: python-bicyclerepair - Python Refactoring Browser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: python-bicyclerepair - Python Refactoring Browser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480146 Summary: Review Request: python-bicyclerepair - Python Refactoring Browser Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: sai...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://saispo.fedorapeople.org/python-bicyclerepair.spec SRPM URL: http://saispo.fedorapeople.org/python-bicyclerepair-0.9-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: The Python Refactoring Browser, helping Pythonistas everywhere glide over the gory details of refactoring their code. Watch him extract jumbled code into well ordered classes. Gasp, as he renames all occurrences of a method. Thank You Bicycle Repair Man! I see with Alexander Kurtakov and bicyclerepair will help for building and maintaining eclipse-pydev. Thanks. -- 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 479903] gdesklets plug-in, Cycle through a collection of pictures
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=479903 --- Comment #10 from MERCIER bioinfornat...@gmail.com 2009-01-15 07:09:25 EDT --- And here the spec file: http://bioinformatiques.free.fr/gdesklet-slideshow.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 479603] Review Request: shcov - A gcov and lcov coverage test tool for bourne shell / bash scripts
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=479603 Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rc040...@freenet.de --- Comment #3 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de 2009-01-15 07:12:53 EDT --- MUSTFIX: /usr/share/shcov/ is unowned -- 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 439100] Review Request: octaviz - 3D visualization system for Octave
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=439100 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fab...@bernewireless.net Flag||needinfo?(e...@eh3.com) --- Comment #19 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-01-15 07:30:12 EDT --- Ed, is this package still approved after the fix for the archs? -- 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 439100] Review Request: octaviz - 3D visualization system for Octave
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=439100 --- Comment #20 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-01-15 07:34:42 EDT --- Claudio, I think that the package is still approved. Please update the spec file because as mentioned in Comment #18 the old one didn't build on ppc/ppc64. F-10 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=649644 F-9 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=649642 -- 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 477190] Review Request: cas - core analysis system
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=477190 --- Comment #11 from Adam Stokes asto...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 07:39:34 EDT --- Hi, could i get a status update on this? Is there anything else needed from me? Thanks! -- 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 456527] Review Request: sil-gentium-fonts - Gentium Basic Font Family
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=456527 Rahul Bhalerao rbhal...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |gentium-basic-fonts - |sil-gentium-fonts - |Gentium Basic Font Family |Gentium Basic Font Family Flag|needinfo?(rbhal...@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #15 from Rahul Bhalerao rbhal...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 07:37:00 EDT --- Here are the updates according to new font packaging guidelines: SPEC URL: http://rbhalera.fedorapeople.org/sil-gentium-fonts/sil-gentium-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://rbhalera.fedorapeople.org/sil-gentium-fonts/sil-gentium-fonts-1.1-1.fc11.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 225809] Merge Review: gmp
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=225809 Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugs.mich...@gmx.net --- Comment #23 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-01-15 07:57:25 EDT --- The reasons is a [probably years old] configure check, which explicitly adds -lm to the linker options, GMP_CHECK_LIBM_FOR_BUILD in configure.in. Since autoreconf is run anyway, this check could be removed. Alternatively, and more dirty, it's possible to drop -lm from config.status and rerun configure afterwards. -- 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 187318] Review Request: mondo
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=187318 MartinG grons...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||grons...@gmail.com --- Comment #39 from MartinG grons...@gmail.com 2009-01-15 08:00:29 EDT --- I just tried the repo file from ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/fedora/9/mondorescue.repo but get Error: Missing Dependency: afio is needed by package mondo-2.2.7-1.fc9.x86_64 (mondorescue) Error: Missing Dependency: buffer is needed by package mondo-2.2.7-1.fc9.x86_64 (mondorescue) when I try yum install mondo mindi. Any workaround? Anything I can do to help testing? -- 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 452584] Review Request: mldonkey - Client for several P2P networks
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=452584 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #32 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-01-15 08:27:05 EDT --- Thanks! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mldonkey Short Description: Client for several P2P networks Owners: peter Branches: El-4 EL-5 F-9 F-10 -- 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 467376] Review Request: mingw32-pixman - MinGW Windows Pixman 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=467376 --- Comment #4 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 08:33:18 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Mostly OK. Needs a license file. I'm not quite sure what the make-pixman-snapshot.sh script is used for. Its not packaged nor used during the build process that I can see. I presume it must be for creating a git/svn/cvs snapshot, which AFAICT we're not using a snapshot so does it need to be included. That file is from the base Fedora pixman package. I just included it so that we keep as close to the base package as possible. It's not used currently in the base package either. It also doesn't currently build in koji but that's expected due to the lack of mingw32-dlfcn. It does build without it though. I'm not sure whether mingw32-dlfcn is currently being reviewed. Its got input on the ticket but nobody currently has ownership of it. I'm hoping that Adel Gadllah will have a look at mingw32-dlfcn (bug 478640) soon. + rpmlint output $ rpmlint -i mingw32-pixman-0.13.2-1.fc10.src.rpm mingw32-pixman.src: W: strange-permission make-pixman-snapshot.sh 0775 A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Not sure what rpmlint is complaining about here :-) It's a shell script, in the SRPM, (potentially) used to build the package, so I don't think this is incorrect. - %doc includes license file This is annoying isn't it. Upstream don't provide a license file and the base Fedora package doesn't include one either. I've raised the following bug upstream: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19582 Below is a new build which preemptively includes this patch. Spec URL: http://hg.et.redhat.com/cgi-bin/hg-misc.cgi/fedora-mingw--devel/file/tip/pixman/mingw32-pixman.spec SRPM URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/mingw/fedora-10/src/SRPMS/mingw32-pixman-0.13.2-2.fc10.src.rpm * Thu Jan 15 2009 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com - 0.13.2-2 - Include LICENSE file (freedesktop bug 19582). $ rpm -qlp /home/rjones/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/mingw32-pixman-0.13.2-2.fc11.noarch.rpm /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/bin/libpixman-1-0.dll /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/include/pixman-1 /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/include/pixman-1/pixman-version.h /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/include/pixman-1/pixman.h /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libpixman-1.dll.a /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libpixman-1.la /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/pkgconfig/pixman-1.pc /usr/share/doc/mingw32-pixman-0.13.2 /usr/share/doc/mingw32-pixman-0.13.2/LICENSE -- 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 467376] Review Request: mingw32-pixman - MinGW Windows Pixman 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=467376 --- Comment #5 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 08:35:01 EDT --- Bug link should be: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19582 -- 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 460600] Review Request: msp430-binutils - Cross compiling binutils targeted at the msp430
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=460600 --- Comment #13 from Robert Spanton rspan...@zepler.net 2009-01-15 08:36:53 EDT --- Hi. I've mailed the binutils mailing list. I've already got a response. The copyright for the patch needs to be assigned to the FSF. I will attempt to get on top of this soon -- by mailing the mspgcc list. I've updated the specfile to contain a link to my post. Available at the same url. SRPM here: http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/rds/rpm/mspgcc/msp430-binutils-2.19-2.fc10.src.rpm Tom: Just to make sure, am I right in thinking that I am now required to demonstrate my ability to follow the Fedora procedures? -- 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 452584] Review Request: mldonkey - Client for several P2P networks
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=452584 --- Comment #33 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 08:46:54 EDT --- (In reply to comment #32) Thanks! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mldonkey Short Description: Client for several P2P networks Owners: peter Branches: El-4 EL-5 F-9 F-10 Couple of questions: (a) do you want me to co-maintain, and (b) EL-4 is a bit adventurous isn't it?? Do we have all the deps in EL-4 for mldonkey? -- 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 478504] Review Request: gget - Download Manager for the GNOME 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=478504
--- Comment #25 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de
2009-01-15 08:48:05 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #24)
error: File not found by glob:
/home/tuxdistro/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/gget-0.0.4-6.fc10.i386/usr/lib/epiphany/*/extensions/gget.py*
Sorry, the files are named gget-epiphany.py* and gget.ephy-extension.
So you could use
%{_libdir}/epiphany/*/extensions/gget-epiphany.py*
%{_libdir}/epiphany/*/extensions/gget.ephy-extension
or simply
%{_libdir}/epiphany/*/extensions/gget*
as you did before.
RPM build errors:
File not found by glob:
/home/tuxdistro/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/gget-0.0.4-6.fc10.i386/usr/lib/epiphany/*/extensions/gget.py*
Instead, using what you said in comment #9:
%{_libdir}/epiphany/*/
This would be ok if we did what I suggested first and did _not_ file the bug
against epiphany, but now it's no longer ok.
Spec URL: http://pastebin.ca/1308934
SRPM URL: http://www.metalinker.org/mirrors/gget/gget-0.0.4-6.fc10.src.rpm
Ok, I will have a final look over them tonight and if everything is ok approve
them. Leave the files as they are now and do the final fixes in the -7 release.
--
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 480037] Review Request: cups-pk-helper - PolicyKit support for system-config-printer
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=480037 --- Comment #6 from Marek Kašík mka...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 09:11:45 EDT --- Hi, thank you for comments. I modified the package according to your comments and I uploaded it to the same location (the same addresses). Original versions are stored in http://mkasik.fedorapeople.org/old/;. Regards Marek P.S.: I had to modify also the scp-policykit.patch patch in http://mkasik.fedorapeople.org/system-config-printer-1.1.1-3.*.src.rpm. I forget to remove one line from the patch. -- 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 476660] Review Request: rubygem-restr - Simple client for RESTful web services
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=476660 Jeroen van Meeuwen kana...@kanarip.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Jeroen van Meeuwen kana...@kanarip.com 2009-01-15 09:34:51 EDT --- No, I'm sorry: New Package CVS Request === Package Name: rubygem-restr Short Description: Simple client for RESTful web services Owners: kanarip Branches: EL-4 EL-5 F-9 F-10 InitialCC: kanarip -- 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 480037] Review Request: cups-pk-helper - PolicyKit support for system-config-printer
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=480037 Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 09:39:13 EDT --- Looks fine now. 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 477313] Review Request: ocaml-preludeml - OCaml utility functions
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=477313 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #14 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 09:25:14 EDT --- Thanks everyone, this is now built in F-10 and Rawhide. -- 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 477313] Review Request: ocaml-preludeml - OCaml utility functions
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=477313 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-15 09:24:37 EDT --- ocaml-preludeml-0.1-0.10.20090113.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ocaml-preludeml-0.1-0.10.20090113.fc10 -- 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 477883] Review Request: rubygem-nokogiri - An HTML, XML, SAX, and Reader parser
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=477883 --- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-15 09:24:09 EDT --- http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-nokogiri/rubygem-nokogiri.spec http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-nokogiri/rubygem-nokogiri-1.1.1-1.fc.src.rpm * Thu Jan 15 2009 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp - 1.1.1-1 - 1.1.1 For F-11: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1055417 For F-10: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1055424 -- 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 459535] Review Request: backup-manager - A command line backup tool for GNU/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=459535 Gratien D'haese gratien.dha...@it3.be changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gratien.dha...@it3.be --- Comment #28 from Gratien D'haese gratien.dha...@it3.be 2009-01-15 09:57:54 EDT --- Did a quick check (as new packager) on backup-manager.spec v0.7.7-6 1/ the spec file looks OK to me, but I'm not an expert on the field (wip) 2/ do a build test: $ rpmbuild -ba backup-manager.spec remark 1: Requires: /bin/bash /bin/sh == see comment #21 (bash is a superset of sh) remark 2: Converting encoding some doc-files + for file in AUTHORS ChangeLog THANKS + mv AUTHORS timestamp + iconv -f ISO-8859-1 -t UTF-8 -o AUTHORS timestamp but later I saw: + cp -pr AUTHORS COPYING ChangeLog NEWS README THANKS /var/tmp/backup-manager-0.7.7-6.fc9-root-makerpm/usr/share/doc/backup-manager-0.7.7 == the files NEWS README and THANKS are not converted. Why not? Small check: in spec file I see: %doc AUTHORS COPYING ChangeLog NEWS README THANKS and, [make...@localhost backup-manager-0.7.7]$ file THANKS THANKS: UTF-8 Unicode English text [make...@localhost backup-manager-0.7.7]$ file README README: ASCII English text remark 3: the t directory in the source tree is not very meaningful, why not call it tests? == I know inspecting the code is not part of the packaging guidelines, but all bits help. You may ignore this if you want as at the end the tests are not part of the RPM itself. 3/ doing a build with the tarball: [make...@localhost rpmbuild]$ rpmbuild -tb -vv /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/SOURCES/backup-manager-0.7.7.tar.gz error: Name field must be present in package: (main package) error: Version field must be present in package: (main package) error: Release field must be present in package: (main package) error: Summary field must be present in package: (main package) error: Group field must be present in package: (main package) error: License field must be present in package: (main package) D: May free Score board((nil)) == this fails. Could this be of a missing spec file in the tarball? [make...@localhost rpmbuild]$ tar ztf SOURCES/backup-manager-0.7.7.tar.gz | grep spec == not found 4/ the remark conc. the development release 0.7.7 is correct. Once the bug report gets a GO (package ready to checked into CVS) make a stable release package instead, e.g. 0.8.0 OK for me, on some minor remarks. Thanks for the learning experience! -- 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 476360] Review Request: rubygem-tlsmail - This library enables pop or smtp via ssl/tls
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=476360 --- Comment #7 from Darryl L. Pierce dpie...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 10:05:46 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) Well, there are still many files in binary rpm which have CRLF line terminators as $ rpm -ql rubygem-tlsmail | xargs file | grep CRLF shows (although rpmlint does not seem to be able to detect these) Here's an update with those CRLF issues fixed: Spec URL: http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/rubygem-tlsmail.spec SRPM URL: http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/rubygem-tlsmail-0.0.1-3.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 460600] Review Request: msp430-binutils - Cross compiling binutils targeted at the msp430
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=460600 --- Comment #14 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 10:50:59 EDT --- Well, at least for this package, yes. :) I'm willing to sponsor you based on the cleanliness of the package and the adherence to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines). Please read them over and be sure you understand them, if you have not done so. Then, go ahead and create your fedora account, sign the CLA, and request to be added to the packager group. All of that is documented in the link I posted in the previous comment. I'll sponsor you, then you can continue on to request CVS for this package, import the SRPM, and throw builds at the koji buildsystem. If you have any questions along the way, feel free to ask them here or email me directly. -- 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 475055] Review Request: gfan - Software for Compu ting Gröbner Fans and Tropical Varieties
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=475055 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|182235 | --- Comment #19 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 11:00:49 EDT --- (In reply to comment #18) (In reply to comment #17) (In reply to comment #16) This is still blocking FE_LEGAL. Spot: should this be oked now? Or is it waiting pending something further? Conrad, did you remove the manual from the package (not the tarball)? Yup. (Went back to using the original (not-stripped) tarball though.) Lifting FE-Legal then. :) -- 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 468120] Review Request: sugar-implode - Implode for Sugar
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=468120
Steven M. Parrish smparr...@shallowcreek.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||smparr...@shallowcreek.net
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|smparr...@shallowcreek.net
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Steven M. Parrish smparr...@shallowcreek.net 2009-01-15
10:57:07 EDT ---
MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review.
1 warning but does not apply to Sugar OK
- MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK.
- MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption on Package Naming Guidelines
.
OK.
- MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
OK.
- MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
OK.
- MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
OK.
- MUST: 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 must be included in %doc.
N/A
- MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK.
- MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. If the reviewer is
unable to read the spec file, it will be impossible to perform a review. Fedora
is not the place for entries into the Obfuscated Code Contest
(http://www.ioccc.org/).
OK.
- MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
OK.
- MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one supported architecture.
OK.
- 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. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch needs to have a bug filed
in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work
on that architecture. The bug number should then be placed in a comment, next
to the corresponding ExcludeArch line. New packages will not have bugzilla
entries during the review process, so they should put this description in the
comment until the package is approved, then file the bugzilla entry, and
replace the long explanation with the bug number. The bug should be marked as
blocking one (or more) of the following bugs to simplify tracking such issues:
FE-ExcludeArch-x86 , FE-ExcludeArch-x64 , FE-ExcludeArch-ppc ,
FE-ExcludeArch-ppc64
OK
- MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK
- MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
OK.
- MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in
%post and %postun. If the package has multiple subpackages with libraries, each
subpackage should also have a %post/%postun section that calls /sbin/ldconfig.
An example of the correct syntax for this is:
%post -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
NA.
- 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.
NA.
- MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory. Refer to the Guidelines for examples.
OK.
- MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
OK.
- MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
OK.
- MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} ( or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ).
OK.
- MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines .
OK.
- MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. This is
described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines .
OK.
[Bug 477190] Review Request: cas - core analysis system
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=477190 --- Comment #12 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 10:59:37 EDT --- Adam, please follow the process at this step (and read that document from top to bottom, so you understand how things work). http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#Add_Package_to_CVS_and_Set_Owner -- 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 467645] Review Request: sugar-distance - Distance measurement for Sugar
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=467645
Steven M. Parrish smparr...@shallowcreek.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||smparr...@shallowcreek.net
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|smparr...@shallowcreek.net
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Steven M. Parrish smparr...@shallowcreek.net 2009-01-15
11:30:13 EDT ---
MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review.
1 warning but does not apply to Sugar OK
- MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK.
- MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption on Package Naming Guidelines
.
OK.
- MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
OK.
- MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
OK.
- MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
OK.
- MUST: 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 must be included in %doc.
N/A
- MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK.
- MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. If the reviewer is
unable to read the spec file, it will be impossible to perform a review. Fedora
is not the place for entries into the Obfuscated Code Contest
(http://www.ioccc.org/).
OK.
- MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
OK.
- MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one supported architecture.
OK.
- 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. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch needs to have a bug filed
in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work
on that architecture. The bug number should then be placed in a comment, next
to the corresponding ExcludeArch line. New packages will not have bugzilla
entries during the review process, so they should put this description in the
comment until the package is approved, then file the bugzilla entry, and
replace the long explanation with the bug number. The bug should be marked as
blocking one (or more) of the following bugs to simplify tracking such issues:
FE-ExcludeArch-x86 , FE-ExcludeArch-x64 , FE-ExcludeArch-ppc ,
FE-ExcludeArch-ppc64
OK
- MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK
- MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
OK.
- MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in
%post and %postun. If the package has multiple subpackages with libraries, each
subpackage should also have a %post/%postun section that calls /sbin/ldconfig.
An example of the correct syntax for this is:
%post -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
NA.
- 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.
NA.
- MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory. Refer to the Guidelines for examples.
OK.
- MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
OK.
- MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
OK.
- MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} ( or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ).
OK.
- MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines .
OK.
- MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. This is
described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines .
OK.
[Bug 480187] New: Review Request: mythes-el - Greek thesaurus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: mythes-el - Greek thesaurus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480187 Summary: Review Request: mythes-el - Greek thesaurus Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: caol...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/caolanm/rpms/mythes-el.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/caolanm/rpms/mythes-el-0.20070412-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Greek thesaurus as used by openoffice.org -- 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 480186] New: Review Request: mythes-fr - French thesaurus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: mythes-fr - French thesaurus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480186 Summary: Review Request: mythes-fr - French thesaurus Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: caol...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/caolanm/rpms/mythes-fr.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/caolanm/rpms/mythes-fr-2.1-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: French thesaurus as used by openoffice.org -- 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 474983] Review Request: TVAnytimeAPI - A java API for parsing, manipulating and creating TV-Anytime metadata
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=474983 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-15 11:54:39 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) * Because I was told I should in another review: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475019#c6 ...honestly, I've also just checked my /usr/share/javadoc/* and while there's not much in there, everything is using %name-%version with a symlink to it :) I checked this by using repoquery, i.e. _all_ packages installing javadoc files under /usr/share/javadoc/. It seems packages reviewed in earlier days seem to be creating such symlinks. Actually this is the first package creating javadoc subpackage trying to create such symlink I reviewed. However this is not a blocker. --- This package (TVAnytimeAPI) is APPROVED by mtasaka --- -- 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 479983] Review Request: emacs-mew - Email client for GNU Emacs
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=479983 --- Comment #3 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-01-15 12:00:07 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) (In reply to comment #1) Does -el subpackage really need Obsoletes/Provides statements? I suppose it should works since it requires emacs-mew which do obsolete/provide old package. I have take a further look on the new and the old package. As far as I can see, the el subpackage should replace the xemace subpackage. So please add the rigth Provides and Obsoletes-Statements for it. As second are you sure that the el subpackage is usable for GNU Emacs, because the old package contains a subpackage with the name xemacs? Gest Regards: Jochen Schmitt -- 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 480050] Review Request: libchamplain - Map view for Clutter
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=480050 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|joc...@herr-schmitt.de -- 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 480187] Review Request: mythes-el - Greek thesaurus
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=480187 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com 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 468120] Review Request: sugar-implode - Implode for Sugar
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=468120 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-01-15 12:07:48 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: sugar-implode Short Description: Implode for Sugar Owners: fab Branches: 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 480186] Review Request: mythes-fr - French thesaurus
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=480186 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com 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 467645] Review Request: sugar-distance - Distance measurement for Sugar
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=467645 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-01-15 12:07:17 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: sugar-distance Short Description: Distance measurement for Sugar Owners: fab Branches: 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 480187] Review Request: mythes-el - Greek thesaurus
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=480187 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-01-15 12:21:35 EDT --- * koji build - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1055835 * rpmlint is silent * license text included and is open source * upstream source verified as 491b6b88184f3f935e9fe2111adb4555 th_el.zip 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 459800] Review Request: python-py - Innovative python library containing py.test, greenlets and other niceties
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=459800
Toshio Ernie Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #15 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com 2009-01-15
12:23:16 EDT ---
I'd still ship the apigen documentation. Maybe something like this::
# see pylib issue67
cp -p py/doc/apigen.txt apigen.txt.bak
cp -p py/doc/index.txt index.txt.bak
rm py/doc/apigen.txt
sed -i '/apigen/d' py/doc/index.txt
PYTHONPATH=$(pwd)/py %{__python} py/bin/py.test py
cp -p apigen.txt py/doc/apigen.txt.bak
cp -p index.txt.bak py/doc/index.txt
You can do this after import, however. This 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 476979] Review Request: python-libasyncns - Python binding for the libasyncns
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=476979 Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(mc...@redhat.com) | --- Comment #5 from Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 12:29:09 EDT --- New version of SRPM: http://mcepl.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-libasyncns-0.7-2.fc10.src.rpm New version of the Spec file: http://mcepl.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-libasyncns.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 476360] Review Request: rubygem-tlsmail - This library enables pop or smtp via ssl/tls
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=476360
--- Comment #8 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-15
12:33:10 EDT ---
Well, sorry for not pointing out before, however:
- now you defined %gemdocsdir, it is better that you use this macro
also on %files
- Also you use %{gemdir}/gems/%{gemname}-%{version}/ in %files, while
%{geminstdir} is also used in %files.
- Now build.log warns about:
---
warning: File listed twice:
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/tlsmail-0.0.1/README.txt
---
- In %changelog, please use %% instead of single % (i.e. %%doc, for
example) to aviod macros from being expanded.
--
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 446976] Review Request: tkabber - Tkabber is a Free and Open Source client for the Jabber instant messaging system.
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=446976 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(lemen...@gmail.co ||m) --- Comment #9 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-15 12:39:54 EDT --- What is the status 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 480186] Review Request: mythes-fr - French thesaurus
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=480186 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-01-15 12:38:27 EDT --- * koji build - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1055865 * rpmlint is silent * license text included and is open source * upstream source verified as 74ca532d23176886beb05248dfa49d0a thesaurus_2-1.zip 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 479953] Review Request: gtksourceviewmm - C++ wrapper for the gtksourceview widget 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=479953
Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-01-15
12:48:30 EDT ---
Good:
+ Name of the package fits naming guidelines
+ Version of the tar ball matches with package version
+ Packaged version is the most current release of the application
+ Package contains a valid license tag
+ License tag contains GPLv2+ as an valid OSS license
+ Package contains verbatin copy of the license text
+ Source in package matches with upstream
(md5sum: 2306402f31dff1cb9d3d664aa9153c28)
+ Consistently usage of rpm macros
+ Package contains devel subpackage
+ Devel subpackage containts proper Req. to main package
+ Package contains no patches
+ %setup use -q flag
+ BUILDROOT will cleaned on the beginning of %install and %clean
+ Local build works fine
+ Build use %{_smp_flags]
+ Build use $RPM_OPT_FLAGS
+ Local install works fine
+ Rpmlint has no complaints for installed package
+ Local uninstall works file
+ Koji build works file
+ Package contains dlconfig scriptlets
+ Rpmlint has no complaints for source rpm
+ Rpmlint has no complaints for the binary rpm
+ Rpmlint has no complaints for the debuginfo rpm
+ Debuginfo rpm contains source files
+ Packaged files doesN't belongs to another package
+ Packaged files have proper file permissions
+ %doc stanza is small, so we need no extra doc subpackage
+ %changelog has a proper format
*** 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 480146] Review Request: python-bicyclerepair - Python Refactoring Browser
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=480146
Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||joc...@herr-schmitt.de
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-01-15
13:32:16 EDT ---
God:
+ Package name fits naming guideline
+ Basename of SPEC file fits package name
+ Could download upstrem tar ball via spectool
+ Tar ball in Package matches with upstream
(md5sum: 825f48384febefacf0717738e909321)
+ Consistently usage of rpm macros
+ Package contains most recent release of thw software
+ License tag has a valid value
+ License tag state BSD as a valid OSS license
+ Package contains a verbatin license text
+ Local build works fine
+ Package will build as noarch
+ Rpmlint ok for source rpm
+ Buildroot will be cleaned on the beginning of %install and %clean
% All packaged files are owned by the package
+ No files has a complict with other package
+ %doc stanza is small, so we need no extra doc subpackage
+ Proper %changelog stanza
Bad:
- Rpmlint complaints, that file in %{python_sitelib} should be executables
- Please notify upstream, that eatch source file should have a copyright notice
- Koji build failed. Please change 'BR python' to 'BR python-devel'
--
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 475018] Review Request: xtvd - A client java library for easy access to the tv data from schedulesdirect.org
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=475018 --- Comment #9 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-15 13:40:04 EDT --- Sorry for not responding.. I will check this package tomorrow or so. -- 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 479056] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Authorization-ACL - ACL Support for Catalyst Applications
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=479056 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-15 13:32:11 EDT --- perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Authorization-ACL-0.10-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Authorization-ACL-0.10-2.fc10 -- 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 480215] New: Review Request: slsnif - Serial line sniffer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: slsnif - Serial line sniffer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480215 Summary: Review Request: slsnif - Serial line sniffer 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/slsnif.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/slsnif-0.4.4-1.fc9.src.rpm Project URL: http://slsnif.sourceforge.net/ Description: Serial line sniffer (slsnif). slsnif is a serial port logging utility. It listens to the specified serial port and logs all data going through this port in both directions. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1055945 rpmlint output: [...@laptop024 i386]$ rpmlint slsnif* 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [...@laptop024 SRPMS]$ rpmlint slsnif-0.4.4-1.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 479056] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Authorization-ACL - ACL Support for Catalyst Applications
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=479056 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-15 13:32:00 EDT --- perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Authorization-ACL-0.10-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Authorization-ACL-0.10-2.fc9 -- 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 480222] New: Review Request: nullmodem - A utility to loopback pseudo-terminals
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: nullmodem - A utility to loopback pseudo-terminals https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480222 Summary: Review Request: nullmodem - A utility to loopback pseudo-terminals 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/nullmodem.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/nullmodem-0.0.5-1.fc9.src.rpm Project URL: http://www.ant.uni-bremen.de/whomes/rinas/nullmodem/ Description: nullmodem creates a virtual network of pseudo-terminals. It can be used as an adapter to connect two programs that normally need serial interface cards. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1056035 rpmlint output: [...@laptop024 i386]$ rpmlint nullmodem* 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [...@laptop024 SRPMS]$ rpmlint nullmodem-0.0.5-1.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 459535] Review Request: backup-manager - A command line backup tool for GNU/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=459535 --- Comment #29 from Guillaume Kulakowski guillaume.kulakow...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-15 14:22:26 EDT --- I have made some change : - Replace bin/sh by bin/bash - Use patch insted multiple sed - UTF8 encode doc files spec: http://trac.llaumgui.com/browser/rpmbuild/SPEC/backup-manager.spec rpm: http://www.llaumgui.com/public/rpm/RPMS/fc10/noarch/backup-manager-0.7.7-7.fc10.noarch.rpm src: http://www.llaumgui.com/public/rpm/SRPMS/fc10/backup-manager-0.7.7-7.fc10.src.rpm I have my validation ? -- 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 473754] Review Request: nopaste - Command-line interface to rafb.net/paste
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=473754 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-15 14:23:47 EDT --- nopaste-2835-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nopaste-2835-2.fc10 -- 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 473754] Review Request: nopaste - Command-line interface to rafb.net/paste
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=473754 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-15 14:23:51 EDT --- nopaste-2835-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nopaste-2835-2.fc9 -- 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 478553] Review Request: perl-WWW-Curl - Perl extension interface for libcurl
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=478553 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-15 14:55:52 EDT --- perl-WWW-Curl-4.05-4.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-WWW-Curl-4.05-4.fc10 -- 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 478553] Review Request: perl-WWW-Curl - Perl extension interface for libcurl
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=478553 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-15 14:57:30 EDT --- perl-WWW-Curl-4.05-4.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-WWW-Curl-4.05-4.fc9 -- 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 480235] New: Review Request: subtitlecomposer - A text-based subtitles editor for KDE.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: subtitlecomposer - A text-based subtitles editor for KDE. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480235 Summary: Review Request: subtitlecomposer - A text-based subtitles editor for KDE. Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: smparr...@shallowcreek.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://tuxbrewr.fedorapeople.org/subtitlecomposer/subtitlecomposer.spec SRPM URL: http://tuxbrewr.fedorapeople.org/subtitlecomposer/subtitlecomposer-0.5.2-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: A text-based subtitles editor for KDE. Build logs here: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1056201 -- 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 476360] Review Request: rubygem-tlsmail - This library enables pop or smtp via ssl/tls
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=476360
--- Comment #9 from Darryl L. Pierce dpie...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 15:09:41
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #8)
Well, sorry for not pointing out before, however:
- now you defined %gemdocsdir, it is better that you use this macro
also on %files
- Also you use %{gemdir}/gems/%{gemname}-%{version}/ in %files, while
%{geminstdir} is also used in %files.
- Now build.log warns about:
---
warning: File listed twice:
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/tlsmail-0.0.1/README.txt
---
- In %changelog, please use %% instead of single % (i.e. %%doc, for
example) to aviod macros from being expanded.
The above points have been fixed:
SPEC URL: http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/rubygem-tlsmail.spec
SRPM URL:
http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/rubygem-tlsmail-0.0.1-4.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 476536] Review Request: zapplet - Zenoss monitoring tray applet
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=476536 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-15 15:15:14 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 472683] Review Request: jpcap - Packet capturing library for Java
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=472683 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #13 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-15 15:21:24 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 479603] Review Request: shcov - A gcov and lcov coverage test tool for bourne shell / bash scripts
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=479603 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #4 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-15 15:20:01 EDT --- cvs done. Please fix the item from comment #3 before importing... -- 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 475897] Review Request: ncmpcpp - Clone of ncmpc with new features and written in C++
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=475897 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #10 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-15 15:18:26 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 459535] Review Request: backup-manager - A command line backup tool for GNU/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=459535 --- Comment #31 from Guillaume Kulakowski guillaume.kulakow...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-15 15:22:05 EDT --- Ok, it's repair : spec: http://trac.llaumgui.com/browser/rpmbuild/SPEC/backup-manager.spec rpm: http://www.llaumgui.com/public/rpm/RPMS/fc10/noarch/backup-manager-0.7.7-7.fc10.noarch.rpm src: http://www.llaumgui.com/public/rpm/SRPMS/fc10/backup-manager-0.7.7-7.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 480235] Review Request: subtitlecomposer - A text-based subtitles editor for KDE.
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=480235
Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu
--- Comment #1 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2009-01-15 15:23:48 EDT
---
initial comments from quick perusal:
1. use BR: kdelibs4-devel instead of kdelibs-devel (to avoid ambiguity)
2. omit
-DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=$(kde4-config --prefix) -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=debugfull
not required or desired, %_cmake_kde4 macro includes both already
3. what's
-DKDE4_BUILD_TESTS:BOOL=${BUILD_TESTS}
for? I don't see BUILD_TESTS defined anywhere. ?
4. missing icon scriptlets
--
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 475055] Review Request: gfan - Software for Compu ting Gröbner Fans and Tropical Varieties
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=475055 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #20 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-15 15:25:24 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 459535] Review Request: backup-manager - A command line backup tool for GNU/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=459535 --- Comment #30 from Guillaume Kulakowski guillaume.kulakow...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-15 14:45:19 EDT --- Hum... is there a problem : r...@enterprise /var/lib/mock/fedora-10-x86_64/result rpm -Uvh backup-manager-0.7.7-7.fc10.noarch.rpm erreur: Dépendances requises: perl(BackupManager::Config) est nécessaire pour backup-manager-0.7.7-7.fc10.noarch perl(BackupManager::Dialog) est nécessaire pour backup-manager-0.7.7-7.fc10.noarch perl(BackupManager::Logger) est nécessaire pour backup-manager-0.7.7-7.fc10.noarch -- 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 452584] Review Request: mldonkey - Client for several P2P networks
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=452584 --- Comment #34 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-15 15:30:39 EDT --- Can you guys figure out what branches you need and re-set the fedora-cvs flag to ? when you are ready? -- 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 475661] Review Request: google-droid-fonts - General-purpose fonts released by Google as part of Android
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=475661 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-15 15:26:50 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 459800] Review Request: python-py - Innovative python library containing py.test, greenlets and other niceties
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=459800 Thomas Moschny thomas.mosc...@gmx.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #16 from Thomas Moschny thomas.mosc...@gmx.de 2009-01-15 15:33:29 EDT --- (In reply to comment #15) I'd still ship the apigen documentation. Maybe something like this:: The testsuite is run in BUILD, not BUILDROOT, (and after %install) so deleting some files there doesn't have an effect on the final package, and thus I don't think it is necessary to make backups. You can do this after import, however. This is APPROVED. Thanks for the review, Toshio! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: python-py Short Description: Innovative python library containing py.test, greenlets and other niceties Owners: thm Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: none Cvsextras Commits: yes -- 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 467645] Review Request: sugar-distance - Distance measurement for Sugar
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=467645 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-15 15:32:22 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 459800] Review Request: python-py - Innovative python library containing py.test, greenlets and other niceties
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=459800 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #17 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-15 15:41:19 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 468120] Review Request: sugar-implode - Implode for Sugar
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=468120 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #5 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-15 15:37:37 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 479982] Review Request: wxapt - A command line tool for decoding weather images transmitted by satellites.
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=479982 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #5 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-15 15:45:34 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 479976] Review Request: xwxapt - An application for decoding and saving weather 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=479976 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-15 15:43:09 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 476660] Review Request: rubygem-restr - Simple client for RESTful web services
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=476660 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #4 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-15 15:46:38 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 480091] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Types-DateTime - DateTime related constraints and coercions for Moose
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=480091 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-15 15:48:06 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 480235] Review Request: subtitlecomposer - A text-based subtitles editor for KDE.
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=480235 --- Comment #2 from Steven M. Parrish smparr...@shallowcreek.net 2009-01-15 16:07:31 EDT --- 1, 2, 3 all fixed Can you give an example of what you are looking at for #4. Never used scriplets for icons b4. -- 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 480235] Review Request: subtitlecomposer - A text-based subtitles editor for KDE.
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=480235 --- Comment #3 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2009-01-15 16:14:16 EDT --- example, kdetoys: http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/devel/kdetoys/kdetoys.spec?revision=1.42view=markup Requires(post): xdg-utils Requires(postun): xdg-utils %post xdg-icon-resource forceupdate --theme hicolor 2 /dev/null || : %postun xdg-icon-resource forceupdate --theme hicolor 2 /dev/null || : -- 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 225735] Merge Review: ethtool
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=225735 Robert Scheck red...@linuxnetz.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tcall...@redhat.com Blocks||182235 --- Comment #5 from Robert Scheck red...@linuxnetz.de 2009-01-15 16:25:02 EDT --- I signed up for co-maintainer as Jeff seems to be AWOL. Looks like he's maybe a better upstream maintainer rather a downstream one - sorry Jeff. When looking around in Red Hat Bugzilla for open bug reports, I also had a look to upstream version control system in order to gather maybe some patches solving mentioned issues or even referenced fixes being not in Fedora: git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/network/ethtool/ethtool.git Unluckily, I've now to add a FE_LEGAL blocker as Jeff was somehow so nice to remove *any* hint how ethtool is now licensed after version 6. And the only license hint in this clone seems to be just the man page - which is referring in a comment, that the man page itself (and just the man page) is licensed as GNU Public License. - could be a mislabeled GPL. So: Tom, your turn first before continuing with something else in this review. -- 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 460600] Review Request: msp430-binutils - Cross compiling binutils targeted at the msp430
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=460600 --- Comment #15 from Robert Spanton rspan...@zepler.net 2009-01-15 16:27:05 EDT --- Apologies for the previous confusion. I had already applied for membership to the packager group, and have completed the CLA. I have read through the Guidelines previously. I had another look just now to verify that I'm familiar with them. Cheers, Rob -- 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 225735] Merge Review: ethtool
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=225735 Jeff Garzik jgar...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(jgar...@redhat.co | |m) | --- Comment #6 from Jeff Garzik jgar...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 16:33:03 EDT --- It's not missing licensing at all. The bog-standard COPYING file is present in every release tarball, including the one in each Fedora and RHEL source rpm. And autogen.sh installs COPYING locally via automake if you are a developer building the git repo. It is 100% standard GNU autotools setup including license. -- 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 479546] Review Request: jailkit - Jailkit limits user accounts to specific files and/or commands
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=479546 Dale Bewley d...@bewley.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||d...@bewley.net --- Comment #5 from Dale Bewley d...@bewley.net 2009-01-15 16:38:46 EDT --- I fixed a couple bugs. The /etc/shells is now handled properly, and I've added a patch to jk_init.ini. Scp needs /dev/null, but that was missing. That should be reported upstream. I don't have a bug account with them yet. * http://bewley.net/linux/rpms/jailkit/jailkit.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 480249] New: Review Request: unalz - Decompression utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: unalz - Decompression utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480249 Summary: Review Request: unalz - Decompression utility Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: oget.fed...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/unalz.spec SRPM URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/unalz-0.63-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Unalz is a utility to decompress .alz files. It supports bzip2/raw format transformation, splitting the compressed file into smaller chunks (alz, a00, a01, ...), extract password protected .alz files, and CRC checks. rpmlint is silent. I had submitted this package before (bug# 477106) but it got rejected because (with the help of friends at #fedora-devel) we figured that the project webpage said: - it is free as in cost, but you are prohibited from on commercial distribution in magazines or CD - it allows distribution only unmodified and patches must be distributed separately. And the tarball did not contain a license file. Now all of these issues seem resolved. The tarball contains a zlib license and the non-free clauses at the project webpage [1] are replaced via zlib license [2]. This package still might have a patent issue (although I couldn't find one) because it is a decompressor of the commercial compressor Alzip [3]. It should be checked by FE-LEGAL to verify that it's OK to distribute this on Fedora. [1] http://www.kipple.pe.kr/win/unalz/ [2] http://www.kipple.pe.kr/etc/zlib_license/ [3] http://www.altools.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 225735] Merge Review: ethtool
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=225735 --- Comment #7 from Sven Lankes s...@lank.es 2009-01-15 17:08:41 EDT --- So depending on the Version of automake I'm using to build (the package from vcs) I get a different license (GPLv2+ vs. GPLV3+)? Can I change the license at random by building it using evilmake, my very own automake-fork? -- 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 479546] Review Request: jailkit - Jailkit limits user accounts to specific files and/or commands
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=479546 --- Comment #6 from Patrick Dignan dignan.patr...@gmail.com 2009-01-15 17:16:30 EDT --- I'll do what I can to merge the two spec files and add your patches. Perhaps it would be best that we co-maintain this 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 480249] Review Request: unalz - Decompression 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=480249 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||182235 -- 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 474983] Review Request: TVAnytimeAPI - A java API for parsing, manipulating and creating TV-Anytime metadata
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=474983 Sandro Mathys s...@sandro-mathys.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from Sandro Mathys s...@sandro-mathys.ch 2009-01-15 17:25:28 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: TVAnytimeAPI Short Description: A Java API for parsing, manipulating and creating TV-Anytime metadata Owners: red 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 480186] Review Request: mythes-fr - French thesaurus
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=480186 Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 17:58:03 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mythes-fr Short Description: French thesaurus Owners: caolanm Branches: devel 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 480187] Review Request: mythes-el - Greek thesaurus
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=480187 Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com 2009-01-15 17:58:57 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mythes-el Short Description: Greek thesaurus Owners: caolanm Branches: devel 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 426387] Merge reviews to be completed for F9
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=426387 Bug 426387 depends on bug 226519, which changed state. Bug 226519 Summary: Merge Review: usermode https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226519 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- 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
