[Bug 478767] Review Request: spring - Realtime strategy game
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=478767 Aurelien Bompard gau...@free.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(ianwel...@gmail.c ||om) --- Comment #11 from Aurelien Bompard gau...@free.fr 2009-01-18 04:15:51 EDT --- if this isn't followed, those users who update the spring package alone will not see an update to spring-engine. That's only if the user chooses to explicitly only update the spring package, and not the spring-engine package, because the latter will also appear in the available updates (since they come from the same srpm). So I don't think this will have any impact on updating, meta-packages are only useful for installing. But I could be wrong ! - I'm not exactly sure why the rpm-buildroot-usage message is appearing. That's because I use RPM_BUILD_ROOT in %build and not in %install. I have to do it however, because that's how scons works. - If you're not using Patch0, remove it. Yes, it was needed for the cmake buildsystem, but since I'm using scons... - The metapackage needs to be noarch. I don't think it's possible to have a noarch package and a binary package come from the same srpm. nuke the -engine package and make it just the spring package. Yeah, I'm leaning in this direction too. * Sun Jan 18 2009 Aurelien Bompard abomp...@fedoraproject.org 0.78.1.1-2 - Other changes from the review: - remove Cmake-specific patch - drop meta-package http://gauret.free.fr/fichiers/rpms/fedora/spring/spring-0.78.1.1-2.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 476404] Review Request: bullet - 3D Collision Detection and Rigid Body Dynamics Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476404 --- Comment #4 from Bruno Mahe br...@gnoll.org 2009-01-18 04:47:41 EDT --- I discovered a bug in the makefiles for 64bit architectures. I will send a patch to upstream and add a patch to the rpm in the mean time. It is not yet ready for a second 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 480485] Review Request: cpmtools - Programs for accessing CP/M disks
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=480485 manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|wo...@nobugconsulting.ro Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-01-18 05:40:48 EDT --- Ahh. the good old days of CP/M ... Waiting for SFDX :) full review will come soon -- 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 480485] Review Request: cpmtools - Programs for accessing CP/M disks
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=480485 --- Comment #2 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-01-18 05:42:59 EDT --- There is a small change, mock build fails with: + rm -rf /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/cpmtools-2.8-1.fc11.x86_64 + mkdir -p /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/cpmtools-2.8-1.fc11.x86_64/usr/bin + mkdir -p /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/cpmtools-2.8-1.fc11.x86_64/usr/share/man/man1 /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/cpmto ols-2.8-1.fc11.x86_64/usr/share/man/man5 + make install BINDIR=/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/cpmtools-2.8-1.fc11.x86_64/usr/bin MANDIR=/builddir/build/BUILDROO T/cpmtools-2.8-1.fc11.x86_64/usr/share/man 'INSTALL=install -p' install -p -m 755 cpmls /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/cpmtools-2.8-1.fc11.x86_64/usr/bin/cpmls install -p -m 755 cpmcp /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/cpmtools-2.8-1.fc11.x86_64/usr/bin/cpmcp install -p -m 755 cpmrm /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/cpmtools-2.8-1.fc11.x86_64/usr/bin/cpmrm install -p -m 755 cpmchmod /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/cpmtools-2.8-1.fc11.x86_64/usr/bin/cpmchmod install -p -m 755 cpmchattr /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/cpmtools-2.8-1.fc11.x86_64/usr/bin/cpmchattr install -p -m 755 mkfs.cpm /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/cpmtools-2.8-1.fc11.x86_64/usr/bin/mkfs.cpm install -p -m 755 fsck.cpm /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/cpmtools-2.8-1.fc11.x86_64/usr/bin/fsck.cpm install -p -m 755 fsed.cpm /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/cpmtools-2.8-1.fc11.x86_64/usr/bin/fsed.cpm install -p -m 644 diskdefs /usr/share/diskdefs install: cannot create regular file `/usr/share/diskdefs': Permission denied make: *** [install] Error 1 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.PUxmZC (%install) -- 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 480485] Review Request: cpmtools - Programs for accessing CP/M disks
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=480485 --- Comment #3 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-01-18 06:17:51 EDT --- to be read There is a small change needed -- 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 480528] New: Review Request: botan - Crypto library written in C++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: botan - Crypto library written in C++ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480528 Summary: Review Request: botan - Crypto library written in C++ Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: thomas.mosc...@gmx.de QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://thm.fedorapeople.org/botan.spec SRPM URL: http://thm.fedorapeople.org/botan-1.8.0-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Botan is a BSD-licensed crypto library written in C++. It provides a wide variety of basic cryptographic algorithms, X.509 certificates and CRLs, PKCS \#10 certificate requests, a filter/pipe message processing system, and a wide variety of other features, all written in portable C++. The API reference, tutorial, and examples may help impart the flavor of the library. Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1063508 -- 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 225999] Merge Review: libdrm
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=225999 Dave Airlie airl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG --- Comment #3 from Dave Airlie airl...@redhat.com 2009-01-18 06:44:46 EDT --- already in. don't think we need review anymore -- 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 225999] Merge Review: libdrm
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=225999 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW -- 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 225999] Merge Review: libdrm
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=225999 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|NOTABUG | --- Comment #4 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-18 06:53:39 EDT --- Merge review cannot be closed without properly reviewed. -- 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 469997] Review Request: ratproxy - A passive web application security assessment tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469997 Rakesh Pandit rakesh.pan...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from Rakesh Pandit rakesh.pan...@gmail.com 2009-01-18 07:08:59 EDT --- Thanks, I will remove that file before importing. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: ratproxy Short Description: A passive web application security assessment tool Owners: rakesh Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: 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 456190] Review Request: dosemu - dos emulator
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=456190 --- Comment #20 from Justin Zygmont solarflo...@gmail.com 2009-01-18 07:29:48 EDT --- ok, i've fixed most of the problems Andrea pointed out in the last message, rpmlint now shows only 2 warnings which I think I have to keep, and I still dont see whats wrong with the release tag so far, I welcome any comments. Ive uploaded the latest RPM's and spec file into: http://fedorapeople.org/~jzygmont/ BTW, the reason why i'm creating an SVN snapshot is because there are important changes in SVN since the last release, and it could be some time before the maintainer creates another main release if ever. In all the years i've been with the project, theres less interest in DOS than there used to be. Having no package available doesnt help, i'd love to have a RPM available for Fedora. This is my first at package building and i've learned a lot so far, i'm also not a developer, i'm a system and network admin. hope this helps -- 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 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-18 07:57:51 EDT --- rubygem-restr-0.4.0-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-restr-0.4.0-1.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 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 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-18 07:57:15 EDT --- rubygem-restr-0.4.0-1.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-restr-0.4.0-1.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 480485] Review Request: cpmtools - Programs for accessing CP/M disks
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=480485
--- Comment #4 from Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org 2009-01-18 08:27:10 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #2)
There is a small change, mock build fails with:
I'm not entirely sure why it failed for you, but 'my mock' didn't complain.
Different root cache ?
Anyway I moved diskdefs to %{_datadir}/%{name}/
I've used sed to modify diskdefs location.
I also had to modify path used in the man files.
new version:
http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/cpmtools.spec
http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/cpmtools-2.8-2.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 480434] Review Request: xcall - GTK+ Packet Radio Terminal Program for ham radio
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=480434 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu --- Comment #2 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2009-01-18 09:03:10 EDT --- Small suggestion, omit GTK+ from the pkg summary/description. -- 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 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added CC||a.bad...@gmail.com --- Comment #24 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-18 09:19:49 EDT --- (In reply to comment #23) Ok, bodhi thinks that gfan-0.3-3.fc9 update already exists! But it doesn't show up in the list nor do searches show anything. I see this issue (I tried to submit gfan 0.3-3.fc9 updates request and got the same error). CCing to Toshio. Would you examine what is happening? -- 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 463767] Review Request: cloog - The Chunky Loop Generator
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=463767 --- Comment #15 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-18 09:29:25 EDT --- ping again? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472229] Review Request: PyQwt - Python bindings for Qwt
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=472229 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(tadej.ja...@tadej ||.hicsalta.si) --- Comment #6 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-18 09:29:13 EDT --- ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 470727] Review Request: slimdata - Tools and library for reading and writing slim compressed data
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=470727 --- Comment #3 from Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org 2009-01-18 09:36:41 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) Thanks for pointing it out. It now builds the docs when I build locally, but there are errors when I try a koji scratch build. It won't fail if you correctly pick doxygen and pdfjam as BR. Also please add doc section as requested to -devel subpackage Then also the symlinks need to be generated properly. I'll report (and discuss) this with upstream before I fix fully. My suggestion is to set soname to to libslim.so. And no further modification would be necessary. Now the test target fails. -- 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 480380] Review Request: python-epdb - extended python debugger
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=480380 --- Comment #5 from Justin M. Forbes jmfor...@linuxtx.org 2009-01-18 09:43:48 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: python-epdb Short Description: Extended Python debugger Owners: jforbes 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 478470] Review Request: mrpt - The Mobile Robot Programming Toolkit (MRPT)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478470 --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-18 09:25:07 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) Sorry for the delay... Yes, I read everything and have some things already solved, other still pending. I wanted to ask you about some small doubts: 1) Until now, I'm building rpms/srpms by invoking: rpmbuild -ta TARBALL.tar.gz, where the .spec file is inside the tarball. I guess this is not the best practice, since any change in the spec file requires an update of the whole tarball. I've read the rpmbuild manpage but not found a command such as rpmbuild -ta TARBALL.tar.gz SOME-FLAG mrpt.spec which allows me to provide the spec file separately. Any ideas about this? - Please use $ rpmbuild -ba foo.spec . 2) Package-splitting: First of all, please explain why you want to split each library into different subpackges. I understand here the splitting into mrpt-XXX library packages, right? - Yes. My intention is to separate dependencies, so an application (in a future package) might require only a subset of the libs. Do you want me to explicitly explain this in comments in the spec file? - Please. -- 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 451298] Review Request: pidgin-msn-pecan - Alternative MSN protocol plugin for libpurple
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=451298
Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
--- Comment #16 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-18
10:05:00 EDT ---
Well, for 0.0.17-1:
* Macros
- Please use macros consistently for cosmetic issue.
As you defined %{realname} macro, it is preferred that
you use this macro also for Name: item.
* License
- The license tag for this package should be GPLv2+.
* Make build.log more verbose
- build.log shows:
--
36 + make -j4
37 [CC] msn.o
38 [CC] nexus.o
39 [CC] notification.o
40 [CC] page.o
41 [CC] session.o
42 [CC] switchboard.o
--
This is not useful. For example we cannot check from these
messages if Fedora specific compiler flags (see below)
are correctly honored.
* Compiler flags / debuginfo rpm
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags
- And actually Fedora specific compiler flags are not correctly
honored currently. You can check what compiler flags should be
passed by
$ rpm --eval %optflags
Currently, on i386:
-
+ make -j2 V=1
gcc -O2 -Wall -I. -D PACKAGE='libmsn-pecan' -DENABLE_NLS -DHAVE_LIBPURPLE
-DPURPLE_DEBUG -D PLUGIN_NAME='msn-pecan' -DPECAN_CVR -DPECAN_DEBUG_SLP -fPIC
-I/usr/include/libpurple -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include
-I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I./fix_purple -D
VERSION='0.0.17' -MMD -o msn.o -c msn.c
gcc -O2 -Wall -I. -D PACKAGE='libmsn-pecan' -DENABLE_NLS -DHAVE_LIBPURPLE
-DPURPLE_DEBUG -D PLUGIN_NAME='msn-pecan' -DPECAN_CVR -DPECAN_DEBUG_SLP -fPIC
-I/usr/include/libpurple -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include
-I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I./fix_purple -D
VERSION='0.0.17' -MMD -o nexus.o -c nexus.c
-
while,
-
$ rpm --eval %optflags
-O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector
--param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables
-
- Also, as a result the created debuginfo rpm contains no debugging
information.
* gettext files
- It seems that po/ directory contains many gettext .po files.
Would you explain why you don't compile these files by msgfmt
(in gettext rpm) and install the created .mo files?
* Test program
- This tarball contains some files under tests/ directory.
If some test programs can be executed, add %check section
and write the programs in %check section.
* Documents
- Also add the following file(s) to %doc.
AUTHORS
COPYING
(TODO)
By the way, please change the release number every time
you modify your spec file to avoid confusion.
--
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 470727] Review Request: slimdata - Tools and library for reading and writing slim compressed data
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=470727 --- Comment #4 from Matthew Truch m...@truch.net 2009-01-18 10:25:39 EDT --- It won't fail if you correctly pick doxygen and pdfjam as BR. Also please add doc section as requested to -devel subpackage Missed that first time around; docs now build, and since there are docs, I now have them included in -devel. Then also the symlinks need to be generated properly. I'll report (and discuss) this with upstream before I fix fully. My suggestion is to set soname to to libslim.so. And no further modification would be necessary. Now the test target fails. Soname set as requested. The test target has never failed on my machine, nor in koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1064087 What error are you seeing? New spec and srpm: http://matt.truch.net/fedora/slimdata.spec http://matt.truch.net/fedora/slimdata-2.6.1b-2.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 470727] Review Request: slimdata - Tools and library for reading and writing slim compressed data
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=470727 --- Comment #5 from Matthew Truch m...@truch.net 2009-01-18 10:27:04 EDT --- I forgot to add, rpmlint still complains about the soname, and about the unstripped binaries/executables. I'm not fully sure what is wrong now. -- 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 480538] New: Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480538 Summary: Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan Product: Fedora Version: 10 Platform: All URL: http://lsl88.yo2.cn OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: urgent Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: liangsuil...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora spec file: http://rpm4fc-cn.googlecode.com/files/iptux.spec rpm file: http://rpm4fc-cn.googlecode.com/files/iptux-0.4.4-3.fc10.i386.rpm sprm file: http://rpm4fc-cn.googlecode.com/files/iptux-0.4.4-3.fc10.src.rpm debuginfo file: http://rpm4fc-cn.googlecode.com/files/iptux-debuginfo-0.4.4-3.fc10.i386.rpm Description: A software for sharing and transporting files and directories in LAN. It is written by C++ and the skin is designed by gtk. Iptux is based on ipmsg, so you can use it send files to a Windows PC which has an ipmsg Windows edition in Lan. If you want, you can compile it in x86_64 platform. Because I have a Fedora x86_64 edition, I do not build rpm for x86_64. Details: You can see more details in here: http://code.google.com/p/iptux/ Also here is its google group: https://groups.google.com/group/iptux These two sites are written in Simplified Chinese. So before reading it, you can use google translate! I feel it is a pretty good software. So I hope iptux can be admitted to add into Fedora repository! Thank you for spending the time to review this package for inclusion. -- 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 480538] Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan
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=480538 Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cassmod...@fedoraproject.or ||g AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|cassmod...@fedoraproject.or ||g -- 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 479832] Review Request: mmpong - a massively multiplayer pong game
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=479832
Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
--- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-18
11:12:00 EDT ---
Well, some random comments.
! First of all, please check your srpm / binary rpms by rpmlint
(in rpmlint rpm) to detect some generic packaging errors.
- %define _prefix is not needed.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/RPMMacros
- Also, %_prefix/share/man should be %{_mandir} , for example
- Please consider to use %{?dist} macro in Release number
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/DistTag
- Games is not valid Group on Fedora. See the explanation by
$ rpmlint -I non-standard-group
- GPL 3 license tag is not a valid tag for Fedora:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing
- Please consider to %{version} macro in Source0:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Using_.25.7Bversion.7D
- BuildRoot you are using is not valid on Fedora:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
- Would you explain what the periods at the head of sentences are for?
- Please don't use debian's way of naming like libmmpong0.9 and
%package libs for example if you want to split libraries and create
a seperate rpm.
and -devel package should simply be %package devel.
! note that %package foo is the same as %package -n %{name}-foo.
You are using many %package -n, but almost all of these can (and
should) be replaced by %pacakge foo (same for %description, %files)
- Please write the dependencies between binary rpms created by
this srpm. For example -devel subpackage should have
Requires: %{name}-libs = %{version}-%{release}.
- By the way would you explain why you have to write mmpong is an ..
sentence on %description of each subpackages?
- %setup should be quiet (use -q option)
- Patch0 does not correspond with %patch (rpm 4.6 refuses this.
you should use %patch0 if you use Patch0)
- By the way your patch cannot not be applied with --fuzz=0
(this is the default on rpm 4.6)
- Please check if %cmake macros can be used for this package:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/cmake
Also as written in cmake wiki:
- support parallel make when possible. Otherwise write in your
spec file as comments that this package does not support parallel
make :
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Parallel_make
- Perhaps you have to add VERBOSE=1 option to make to make build.log
verbose.
- %buildroot must once be cleaned at the beginning of %install
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines
- Please avoid to use %makeinstall unless impossible:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Why_the_.25makeinstall_macro_should_not_be_used
- What is %run_ldconfig macro? Also your srpm does not seem to create
%{name} package itself. Would you explain why?
- %{name}-libs package needs /sbin/ldconfig at %post{,un} (by the
way if only /sbin/ldconfig should be executed at %post, use
%post libs -p /sbin/ldconfig, for example)
- %defattr is missing on all packages (see ReviewGuidelines wiki)
- Please don't ship static archives (libfoo.a) unless needed.
If not avoidable, please package it seperately:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries
- By the way would you explain why -devel subpackge contains no header files?
(is this -devel subpackage useful?)
- Packages containing pkgconfig .pc file must have Requires: pkgconfig
(written in ReviewGuidelines wiki)
- Using %_prefix/games, %_datadir/games is not allowed on Fedora:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Games/Packaging
- Installed desktop file must be handled by desktop-file-{install,validate}
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage
- %{_prefix}/share/icons directory _itself_ should not be owned by
-gl subpackage:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership
- Please write %changelog
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 470727] Review Request: slimdata - Tools and library for reading and writing slim compressed data
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=470727 Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|co...@gnome.eu.org Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #6 from Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org 2009-01-18 11:17:47 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) I forgot to add, rpmlint still complains about the soname, and about the unstripped binaries/executables. I'm not fully sure what is wrong now. You need to setup soname to libslim.so.major. I'm sorry for misleading you. For now you can setup soname to libslim.so.2, but probably the best way to handle this is to contact upstream. btw any news on that ? Also you need to make sure test target correctly picks libslim.so.2, so you need to symlink libslim.so to libslim.so.2 in builddir, or tests would fail: ../bin/slim --preserve -k -C -m2 -i -c1 -r16384 /tmp/data_partial.bin ../bin/slim: error while loading shared libraries: libslim.so.2: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory Another suggestion is using INSTALL=install -p to make install from %files section to preserve timestamps of installed files. -- 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 --- Comment #4 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-01-18 11:43:47 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Which version of Fedora did you try? F-10 (x86_64) full updated. -- 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 #5 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-01-18 11:46:56 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) upstream doesn't support xemacs anymore. that's why I've got rid of it from new package. I'm not quite sure if adding Provides and even Obsoletes is a good idea in this case. Ok, at the minimum you should have a Obsolete-Statement, so the xemacs subpackage may remove clearly. Best 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 479951] Review Request: iniparser - a library for parsing ini-style files
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=479951 Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-01-18 11:55:14 EDT --- Good: + Local build works fine. + Files are install with the install programm. + Empty %check stanza is removed. Bad: - Package doesn't contains verbatin copy of the license text, but upstream tar ball contains a LICENSE file. If you are add the LICENSE file into the %doc stanza you package is APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475097] Review Request: gimp-fourier-plugin - A fourier transformation plugin for GIMP.
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=475097 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp --- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-18 12:31:16 EDT --- Well, I cannot see any license texts in this package. Would you explain what file shows the license of 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 478767] Review Request: spring - Realtime strategy game
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=478767 --- Comment #12 from Aurelien Bompard gau...@free.fr 2009-01-18 12:40:22 EDT --- * Sun Jan 18 2009 Aurelien Bompard abomp...@fedoraproject.org 0.78.2.1-1 - update to 0.78.2.1 (bugfix release) http://gauret.free.fr/fichiers/rpms/fedora/spring/spring-0.78.2.1-2.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 479951] Review Request: iniparser - a library for parsing ini-style files
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=479951 --- Comment #4 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-18 12:48:43 EDT --- Hello, Jochen. Are you a sponsor? (sorry if you are so) Any NEEDSPONSOR blocking review tickets needs the approval by sponsor members. -- 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 --- Comment #5 from Debarshi Ray debarshi@gmail.com 2009-01-18 12:55:32 EDT --- I tried a Koji scratch build against dist-f10-updates-candidate and it finished successfully: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1064274 Any idea what is going wrong? -- 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 --- Comment #6 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-01-18 13:10:26 EDT --- Unfortunately No. -- 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 467416] Review Request: mingw32-cairo - MinGW Windows Cairo 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=467416 --- Comment #6 from Daniel Berrange berra...@redhat.com 2009-01-18 13:15:28 EDT --- The reason I let it pull in Freetype/fontconfig is that this matches the deps from the Linux native specfile I was trying to keep as closely aligned as possible. Likewise for removing the charset.alias this is just matching native. -- 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 480485] Review Request: cpmtools - Programs for accessing CP/M disks
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=480485 --- Comment #5 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-01-18 13:23:41 EDT --- Failed koji scratch build of http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/cpmtools-2.8-1.fc10.src.rpm, in case that you want to investigate: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1064398 http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/cpmtools-2.8-2.fc10.src.rpm seems OK, I'll come back with a review tomorrow -- 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 467416] Review Request: mingw32-cairo - MinGW Windows Cairo 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=467416 --- Comment #7 from Erik van Pienbroek erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl 2009-01-18 13:34:46 EDT --- As I see it, fontconfig and freetype are really required for Cairo on Linux enviroments (as they are considered 'native' for Linux). However, for Windows environments there's a Cairo font backend available which uses the native font rendering functions from the Win32 API. To me it looks like adding dependencies on freetype and fontconfig only introduces unncessary bloat for a Win32 build of Cairo. Are there any specific reasons why you want to add dependencies on fontconfig and freetype? Applications (like GTK+) shouldn't really care about the font backend used by Cairo. -- 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 462621] Review Request: pycryptopp - Python wrappers for the Crypto++ 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=462621 Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|bdpep...@gmail.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org 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 480528] Review Request: botan - Crypto library 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=480528 Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||joc...@herr-schmitt.de --- Comment #1 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-01-18 14:14:43 EDT --- Good: + Basename of SPEC file matches with package name + Package contains proper License tag + License tag contains BSD as a proper OSS license + Package contains verbatin copy of the license text + Package contains most recent version of the software + Tar ball in source package matches with upstream (md5sum: 827c81f42cd1c118fc9bf1891be7cde5) + source package could downloaded form upstream with spectool + consistently usage of rpm macros + Build use RPM_OPT_FLAGS + Package contains devel subpackage + Devel subpackage has proper Requires to main package * Local build works fine + Build use _smp_mflags + Rpmlint quite on source package + Rpmlint quite on binary package + Rpmlint quite on debuginfo package + Local install works fine + Rpmlint is quite on installed package + Package contains a testsuite in the %check stanza + Local uninstall works fine + Main package contains proper ldconfig scriptlets + Buildroot will be cleaned on the beginning of the %clean and %install stanza + All files of the package are owned by the package + %files stanza contains no duplicated file definiton + There are no file conflict with other packages + All packaged files has proper files permissions + As far as I can see, system libraries for bzis2, openssl and zlib was used. + %doc stanza is small, so we need no separate doc subpackage + Build on Koji works fine Bad: + The files tutorial.* and api.* should be part of the devel subpackage stanza, because they contains explainations how to develope applications for this library TODO: - Please notify upstream, that each source file should have a proper copyright notice You package is APPROVED, if you may move the tutorial.* and api.* doc files into the %doc stanza of the devel subpackage -- 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 480528] Review Request: botan - Crypto library 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=480528 Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de changed: What|Removed |Added 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 478846] Review Request: cpm - Console Password Manager
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=478846 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #8 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-01-18 14:21:00 EDT --- This seems imported built. Closing. -- 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 Keywords||Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | --- Comment #7 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-01-18 14:20:53 EDT --- UNfortunately, I'M was not aware, that ther is a libgtksourceviewmm package which is depending on gtksourceview. So I wan't to suggest, that you are renaming the package into libgtksourceviewmm2 for clarification, if possible. -- 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 478674] Review Request: pp3 - Creation of sky charts in Postscript or PDF format
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=478674 --- Comment #8 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-01-18 14:24:35 EDT --- Marek: ping. Please import build this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475097] Review Request: gimp-fourier-plugin - A fourier transformation plugin for GIMP.
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=475097 --- Comment #2 from Fabian Deutsch fabian.deut...@gmx.de 2009-01-18 14:27:55 EDT --- I contacted the author, he'll include the missing license informations in the next 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 480538] Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan
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=480538 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|low |medium CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi Severity|urgent |medium -- 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 478767] Review Request: spring - Realtime strategy game
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=478767 Ian Weller ianwel...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(ianwel...@gmail.c | |om) | --- Comment #13 from Ian Weller ianwel...@gmail.com 2009-01-18 14:38:12 EDT --- (The correct URL is http://gauret.free.fr/fichiers/rpms/fedora/spring/spring-0.78.2.1-1.fc10.src.rpm ) == FULL REVIEW == - The timestamp on the source file is not the same as the server. Please download source files with wget -N or curl -R. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Timestamps - Please don't use a trademark in the Summary tag or the %description. For the Summary: Multiplayer, 3D realtime strategy combat game would work for me. [ OK ] source files match upstream: 4765d25d44f4bdc2f68af0f76743f30d spring_0.78.2.1_src.tar.lzma 4765d25d44f4bdc2f68af0f76743f30d spring_0.78.2.1_src.tar.lzma.1 [ OK ] package meets naming and versioning guidelines. [ OK ] spec is properly named, 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. [ OK ] license text included in package. [ OK ] latest version is being packaged. [ OK ] BuildRequires are proper. [ OK ] compiler flags are appropriate. [ OK ] %clean is present. [ OK ] package builds in mock. [ WAIT ] package installs properly. [ OK ] debuginfo package looks complete. [ OK ] rpmlint is silent. rpm-buildroot-usage %build message due to scons. [ OK ] final provides and requires are sane [ N/A ] %check is present and all tests pass: [ OK ] no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. I'm assuming /usr/lib/spring isn't a regular linker search path. please correct me if I'm wrong. [ OK ] owns the directories it creates. [ OK ] doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. [ OK ] no duplicates in %files. [ OK ] file permissions are appropriate. [ OK ] scriptlets match those on ScriptletSnippets page. [ 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. [ OK ] desktop files valid and installed properly. Waiting on these for package approval: - Timestamp fix - Summary/%description without trademarks - Other three package reviews -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478470] Review Request: mrpt - The Mobile Robot Programming Toolkit (MRPT)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478470
--- Comment #14 from Jose Luis joseluisblan...@gmail.com 2009-01-18 14:41:27
EDT ---
Well, here is the new revision:
SPEC: http://babel.isa.uma.es/mrpt/src-repo/rpm/mrpt.spec
SRPM:
http://babel.isa.uma.es/mrpt/src-repo/rpm/mrpt-0.6.5-0.1.20090118svn746.fc10.src.rpm
I finally decided to use the snapshot versions format so I can integrate all
the fixes in upstream.
btw, if I got it right, a package, say foo-1.2.3-0.1.20090118svn MUST have an
associated tarball
foo-1.2.3.tar.gz, without any indication of the snapshot?? I'd prefer more
descriptive names containing
the snapshot part, so please confirm me if that is the preferred naming or I
can create tarballs with the
svn number prefix.
Next are the answers to your points:
(In reply to comment #9)
** Description etc
* License
- License tag should be GPLv3+.
Done.
* BuildRequires:
- build.log says:
107 -- Looking for doxygen...
108 -- Looking for doxygen... - found /usr/bin/doxygen
109 -- Looking for dot tool...
110 -- Looking for dot tool... - NOT found
Perhaps BuildRequires: graphviz is missing.
This is not an issue. dot is actually not used.
In fact the CMake command is look for doxygen, but it internally also looks
for dot...
** %prep - %install
* Build failure
- Currently your srpm does not build by 4 reasons.
1 %check fails as
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1042528
This is because at make test this test needs
system-widely installed libmrpt-core.so.0.6, but on mockbuild
apparently this library is not yet installed system-widely.
Fixed with your LD_LIBRARY_PATH... solution.
2 The rebuilt libraries like libmrpt-core.so.0.6 are installed
under %buildroot/usr/lib, not %buildroot%_libdir even with
64 bits architecture
Fixed in upstream CMakeLists.txt's.
3 CMakeLists.txt adds -mtune=native to CPPFLAGS, which
is not recognized on ppc (maybe also on ppc64)
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1042483
Also, CMakeLists.txt adds -O3 compilation option, however
Fedora default optimation level is -O2 so this should
be removed.
Fixed through a cmake argument -DCMAKE_MRPT_IS_RPM_PACKAGE=1 which internally
disables -mtune and O3.
4 %files lists are wrong. Some files are installed
under %{_datadir}/mrpt/datasets/ but no files are installed
under %{_datadir}/mrpt/config_files/datasets/
Solved.
** %files, etc
* Package splitting
- First of all, please explain why you want to split each
library into different subpackges.
Comments added to specfile.
* desktop files
- desktop-file-install or so must be executed against
desktop files to be installed.
Done, at %install.
* Scriptlets
- Some files has MimeType, so please refer to:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#desktop-database
- This package installs XML files under %_datadir/mime/packages:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#mimeinfo
Both done at %post/postun of mrpt-apps.
* Directory ownership
- The directory %{_datadir}/mrpt is owned by 2 packages. Please
change this so that only one package owns this directory
( I guess having this directory owned by -core package is
an alternative solution)
The -core package now owns that directory.
- %{_datadir}/doc/mrpt-doc/ is not owned by any packages.
It's now of the package mrpt-doc.
* pkgconfig
- pkgconfig/libmrpt.pc.in contains:
3 libdir=${exec_prefix}/lib
This is expanded as /usr/lib, even on 64 bits architecture,
while this should be expanded as /usr/lib64.
Fixed using the LIB_SUFFIX variable in CMake (not tested...).
- Also installed libmrpt.pc contains:
9 Libs: -L${libdir} -ldc1394 -lGL -lGLU -lglut -lftdi -lusb -l3ds -lz
-ljpeg -lrt -pthread -lmrpt-ann /usr/lib64/libboost_program_options-mt.so
-pthread -lwx_baseu-2.8 -lwx_gtk2u_core-2.8 -lwx_gtk2u_gl-2.8
-lwx_gtk2u_adv-2.8 -lwx_gtk2u_aui-2.8 -lmrpt-core -lmrpt-aria
You're right! Most of the -lxxx were not required.
* Header files dependency
- Please check if proper dependency packages are installed
with -devel packages to satisfy include macro dependencies
in header files.
- For example, gui/WxUtils.h contains
-
40 #include wx/sizer.h
41 #include wx/statbmp.h
42 #include wx/menu.h
[Bug 478769] Review Request: spring-installer - Installer for the Spring game's maps and mods
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=478769 --- Comment #2 from Ian Weller ianwel...@gmail.com 2009-01-18 14:46:03 EDT --- OK, upstream is obnoxious and deletes their old releases when they come out with new versions. 20090115 is apparently out. -- 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 480538] Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan
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=480538 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- 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 480528] Review Request: botan - Crypto library 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=480528 Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review- |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 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 Denis Leroy de...@poolshark.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG -- 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 478769] Review Request: spring-installer - Installer for the Spring game's maps and mods
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=478769 --- Comment #1 from Ian Weller ianwel...@gmail.com 2009-01-18 14:42:18 EDT --- Wrong SRPM url (404): http://gauret.free.fr/fichiers/rpms/fedora/spring/spring-installer-20081228-2.fc10.src.rpm seems correct, using that. -- 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 #8 from Denis Leroy de...@poolshark.org 2009-01-18 14:42:41 EDT --- I would rather not, since the upstream tarball name was indeed renamed to gtksourceviewm for the 2.0 API release. In a way the naming of the 1.0 API to libgtksourceviewmm was an anomaly which got corrected :-) Also, the plan is to EOL libgtksourceviewmm. -- 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 478767] Review Request: spring - Realtime strategy game
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=478767 --- Comment #14 from Rudolf Kastl che...@gmail.com 2009-01-18 15:08:33 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329305) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329305) python 2.6 sconstruct patch for building on rawhide python 2.6 sconstruct patch for building on 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 480538] Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan
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=480538
Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||joc...@herr-schmitt.de
--- Comment #1 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-01-18
15:35:14 EDT ---
Good:
+ Basename of SPEC files matches with package name
+ Package contains a License tag
+ Package contains most recent release of the software
+ %setup use -q flag
+ make use _smp_mflags
+ Local build works fine.
+ Debuginfo package contains source files
+ Buildroot will be cleaned on the beginning of %install andn %clean
+ Files permissions seems ok
+ All packaged files are owned by this package
+ There are no file comflict with other packates.
+ %doc stanza contains a small amount of files, so we need no separate doc
subpackage
Bad:
- License tag contains no proper license specification, it should be GPLv2+
- Source0 tag is not full qualified
- Build doesn't use RPM_OPT_FLAGS
- Rpmlint complaints on source package:
iptux.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot A software for sharing in LAN.
iptux.src: W: non-standard-group Application/Network
iptux.src: W: invalid-license GNU General Public License v2
- Rpmlint complaints on binary package:
rpmlint iptux-0.4.4-3.fc10.x86_64.rpm
iptux.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency glib
iptux.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot A software for sharing in LAN.
iptux.x86_64: W: non-standard-group Application/Network
iptux.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog -0.4.4-3 ['0.4.4-3.fc10',
'0.4.4-3']
iptux.x86_64: W: invalid-license GNU General Public License v2
iptux.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/zh_CN/LC_MESSAGES/iptux.mo
- Package contains no verbain copy of the license text, but upstream tar ball
contains one
- Package contains no BR and Req. to desktop-file-utils
- Please ud %{_bindir} instead of %{_prefix}/bin
- Build fails on Koji please refer to
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1064580
- Please use %file_lang macro for localization
--
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 479951] Review Request: iniparser - a library for parsing ini-style files
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=479951 Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 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 480528] Review Request: botan - Crypto library 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=480528 Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 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 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 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nicolas.mail...@laposte.net |rbhal...@redhat.com Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #16 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-01-18 15:42:18 EDT --- You still need to take care of http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_%28FAQ%29#What_font_packaging_changes_are_needed_with_post-1.13_fontpackages_.3F Since FPC unexpectedly decided to change our package naming rules. Apart that is looks nice so I'm going to approve it now and let you take care of the naming before the Fedora import. You can now continue starting from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle#3.a ⇒ re-assigning Thank you for packaging a new font in Fedora ✻✻✻ 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 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 480434] Review Request: xcall - GTK+ Packet Radio Terminal Program for ham radio
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=480434 --- Comment #3 from Randall Berry randyn3...@gmail.com 2009-01-18 15:48:36 EDT --- Spec URL: http://dp67.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/SPECS/xcall.spec SRPM URL: http://dp67.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/SRPMS/xcall-0.17-4.fc10.src.rpm * Sun Jan 18 2009 Randall J. Berry 'Dp67' d...@fedoraproject.org 0.17-4 - Omit GTK+ from description -- 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 479585] Review Request: megaupload-dl - Megaupload automatic downloader
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=479585 Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 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 480538] Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan
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=480538 Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|cassmod...@fedoraproject.or |joc...@herr-schmitt.de |g | -- 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 480538] Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan
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=480538
Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||177841
AssignedTo|joc...@herr-schmitt.de |nob...@fedoraproject.org
--- Comment #2 from Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-18
15:59:53 EDT ---
I just took a short look at your package.. just a very short look
RPMLINT-ERRORS
--
1)
- iptux.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot A software for sharing in LAN.
remove the .
2)
- iptux.src: E: description-line-too-long A software for sharing and
transporting files and directories in LAN. It is written by C++ and the skin is
designed by gtk. Iptux is based on ipmsg, so you can use it send files to a
Windows PC which has an ipmsg Windows edition in Lan.
split it in more and shorter lines
3)
- iptux.src: W: non-standard-group Application/Network
take a look at /usr/share/doc/rpm-4.6.0/GROUPS
Applications/Internet
4)
- iptux.src: W: invalid-license GNU General Public License v2
take a look at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing
GPLv2
5)
- iptux.i386: E: explicit-lib-dependency glib
you don't need glib in Requires
6)
- iptux.i386: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog -0.4.4-3 ['0.4.4-3.fc10',
'0.4.4-3']
you packed the source! don't do this. use the source that upstream given.
7)
- iptux.i386: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/zh_CN/LC_MESSAGES/iptux.mo
%files -f %{name}.lang
Things in the specfile
--
a)
you: Source0:iptux-0.4.4-3.tar.gz
should: Source0: http://iptux.googlecode.com/files/iptux-0.4.4.tar.gz
better: Source0:
http://iptux.googlecode.com/files/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
b)
%doc INSTALL NEWS README TODO AUTHORS
- don't use INSTALL for %doc, because users are not interessted in a howto of
installation. this is a package and the installation was done by you.
- add the COPYING file to %doc, because License file are very
- NEWS looks like this is just a chinese header-file. if news don't show
news, just an header you should remove it
- Same for README
c)
you %{_prefix}/bin/iptux
very better: %{bindir}/%{name}
d)
you: %{_datadir}/applications/*
better: %{_datadir}/applications/iptux.*
or: %{_datadir}/applications/iptux.desktop
e)
you: %{_datadir}/locale/*
add %files -f %{name}.lang and remove this completely
f)
you:
%{_datadir}/pixmaps/*
better:
%{_datadir}/pixmaps/%{name}/
%{_datadir}/pixmaps/ip-tux.png
%{_datadir}/pixmaps/ip-penguin.png
to d/e/f
please create an ownage of the files YOU packaged. not of all in the directory,
because you will take ownage of files you haven't created. files of other
packages.
g)desktop file install
--rebuild-mime-info-cache
Why? ip-tux doesn't need to mime a
h) desktop file install
--delete-original
Why are you deleting the desktop file to reinstall it again.
You should validate the desktopfile
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage
i)
Add the desktop-file-utils to BuildRequires
j)
BuildRequires: glib-devel, GConf2, gtk2-devel
Requires: glib, gtk2, GConf2, gtk2
rpm can create Requires from the BuildRequires.
Example: If you say BuildRequires: gtk2-devel rpm will automaticly create
Requires: gtk2
gtk2 is doubled...
k)
%post
update-desktop-database %{_datadir}/applications /dev/null || :
%postun
update-desktop-database %{_datadir}/applications /dev/null || :
you don't need this. why are you adding these commands?
l)
you should think about better texts for the changelog and use the right
version-number.
I will remove me from Asignee and add me to CC because you are sponsored and
you need a sponsor.
I will add the need sponor bug
I can not sponsor you
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426751] Review Request: ghc-X11 - A Haskell binding to the X11 graphics 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=426751 --- Comment #42 from Yaakov Nemoy loupgaroubl...@gmail.com 2009-01-18 16:17:30 EDT --- Ok, finally, and i should be alot more on top of this in the far reaching future (i think), i have some packages. SPEC:http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/review/ghc-X11.spec SRPM:http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/review/ghc-X11-1.4.5-1.fc11.src.rpm This is more or less pretty much based on the latest template. It's being managed by fedora-devshell, which means getting hotfixes done should be fast. Note: AFAIK, we don't have the macros needed in F10 right now, so this only builds in rawhide. The SRPM is output from mock using rawhide. Once the macros are in F10, supporting it there should be trivial. I submit this for 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 480434] Review Request: xcall - Packet Radio Terminal Program for ham radio
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=480434 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: xcall - |Review Request: xcall - |GTK+ Packet Radio Terminal |Packet Radio Terminal |Program for ham radio |Program for ham radio -- 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 480552] New: Review Request: poweradmin - A friendly web-based DNS administration tool for Bert Hubert's PowerDNS server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: poweradmin - A friendly web-based DNS administration tool for Bert Hubert's PowerDNS server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480552 Summary: Review Request: poweradmin - A friendly web-based DNS administration tool for Bert Hubert's PowerDNS server Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ru...@rubenkerkhof.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://ruben.fedorapeople.org/poweradmin.spec SRPM URL: http://ruben.fedorapeople.org/poweradmin-2.1.2-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Poweradmin is a friendly web-based DNS administration tool for Bert Hubert's PowerDNS server. The interface has full support for most of the features of PowerDNS. It has full support for all zone types (master, native and slave), for supermasters for automatic provisioning of slave zones, full support for IPv6 and comes with multi-language support. -- 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 451298] Review Request: pidgin-msn-pecan - Alternative MSN protocol plugin for libpurple
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=451298 --- Comment #17 from Edouard Bourguignon ma...@linuxed.net 2009-01-18 16:28:05 EDT --- In 0.0.17-3: * The realname macro is now also used in Name item * License has been changed to GPLv2+ * Build.log has been made more verbose by adding make flags V=1 DEBUG=1 * Translation is now packaged, .mo files are created and installed * Check section added * Missing documents have been added * Release number changed 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 480538] Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan
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=480538 Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW -- 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 451298] Review Request: pidgin-msn-pecan - Alternative MSN protocol plugin for libpurple
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=451298 --- Comment #18 from Edouard Bourguignon ma...@linuxed.net 2009-01-18 16:45:23 EDT --- Sorry, I forget the links The .spec is here: http://www.linuxed.net/~madko/fedora/purple-msn-pecan.spec And the srpm: http://www.linuxed.net/~madko/fedora/purple-msn-pecan-0.0.17-3.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 225660] Merge Review: crash
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=225660 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lkund...@v3.sk --- Comment #2 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-01-18 16:45:00 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) - license seems to be GPLv2+. A lot of files are GPL+, some are GPLv2+, some have no license at all. A cleanup of those would be nice Certain files (xen_hyper*) use GPLv2 (only), spot already fixed this in CVS. Other problems (fixed) There are yet more: - You use Revision tag to mark upstream release, which is wrong. It is meant to be used to version the SPEC file. Given you (package owner, crash group, seem to be upstream, you can definitely fix this by changing the versioning scheme. (e.g use 4.0.8 instead of 4.0-8)) - The bundled gdb is old and has issues. It is likely that some of older GDB security problems affect it: http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2005-1704 http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2005-1705 http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2006-4146 Please address those, if they are relevant. Notify your SRT that you bundle GDB code and communicate with GDB upstream (or people involved in Archer, your colleagues) to avoid having to bundle GDB in longer run. -- 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 480528] Review Request: botan - Crypto library 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=480528 Thomas Moschny thomas.mosc...@gmx.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Thomas Moschny thomas.mosc...@gmx.de 2009-01-18 16:48:06 EDT --- Thanks for the review! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: botan Short Description: Crypto library written in C++ 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 478565] Review Request: gupnp-igd - Library to handle UPnP IGD port mapping
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=478565 Denis Leroy de...@poolshark.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||de...@poolshark.org AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|de...@poolshark.org Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Denis Leroy de...@poolshark.org 2009-01-18 16:54:06 EDT --- * Package name OK * Source md5sum correct * License is LGPLv2+ * Package works (able to compile tests and examples) * Buidls, BR and R are OK * %files section OK * rpmlint - mixed-use of-spaces-and-tabs : can be ignored - unused-direct-shlib-dependency : could use the --as-needed sed trick, but not a blocker Warning: on Fedora branches = 10, the devel package will Require gupnp-devel Package is APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467627] Review Request: fsniper - A tool that monitors directories for new files and invokes scripts on them
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=467627 Jakub Hrozek jhro...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #13 from Jakub Hrozek jhro...@redhat.com 2009-01-18 17:04:39 EDT --- Built for rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1064686 Other branches will follow accordingly. -- 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 480380] Review Request: python-epdb - extended python debugger
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=480380 Justin M. Forbes jmfor...@linuxtx.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- 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 478767] Review Request: spring - Realtime strategy game
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=478767 --- Comment #15 from Ian Weller ianwel...@gmail.com 2009-01-18 17:09:42 EDT --- Problems with building on rawhide: - Python 2.6 isn't detected (see patch in comment 14) - the devil libraries aren't detected correctly for some odd reason So these will also need to be fixed. -- 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 480528] Review Request: botan - Crypto library 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=480528 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-18 17:29:19 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 469997] Review Request: ratproxy - A passive web application security assessment tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469997 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #15 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-18 17:30:23 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 451298] Review Request: pidgin-msn-pecan - Alternative MSN protocol plugin for libpurple
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=451298
--- Comment #19 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-01-18 17:31:21
EDT ---
Change the build line to
make CFLAGS=%{optflags} %{?_smp_mflags} V=1 DEBUG=1
That way the Fedora compiler flags are correctly used.
--
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 477533] Review Request: rubygem-mechanize - A handy web browsing ruby object
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=477533
Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||oget.fed...@gmail.com
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|oget.fed...@gmail.com
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-01-18
17:30:57 EDT ---
Hi Mamoru,
I reviewed this package. There are a few minor things to go through:
* rpmlint gives bunch of dangling-symlink warnings. But these are resolved by
the dependencies by the packages, so it is OK.
The other rpmlint complaints are:
rubygem-mechanize.noarch: E: zero-length
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/mechanize-0.9.0/lib/www/mechanize/chain/post_connect_hook.rb
Is this needed?
rubygem-mechanize-doc.noarch: W: no-documentation
I see that both rubygem-gettext-doc and rubygem-zoom-doc install their
documentation (examples,test) inside %doc
What is the reason that this package is different?
rubygem-mechanize-doc.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/mechanize-0.9.0/test/htdocs/google.html
This is possibly a wrong permission error. It can easily be fixed.
ruby-mechanize.noarch: W: no-documentation
This one can be ignored.
* I don't think we need to package Manifest.txt. Do we usually package manifest
files on ruby packages?
* The license file and the website license page say GPLv2+. The source code
files do not indicate a license. I think setting the license as GPLc2+ will be
more appropriate.
* Latest version must be packaged. I can't find any information to confirm
this. Where is download section on the website?
* Ruby guidelines say: A ruby extension/library package must indicate what it
provides with a Provides: ruby(LIBRARY) = VERSION declaration in the spec file
So I think
Provides: ruby(%{gemname}) = %{version}-%{release}
Provides: rubygem(%{gemname}) = %{version}-%{release}
must be changed to
Provides: ruby(%{gemname}) = %{version}
Provides: rubygem(%{gemname}) = %{version}
* Do we need this line:?
#Requires: rubygem(hoe)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468462] Review Request: sbackup - Simple Backup Suite for desktop use
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468462 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #11 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-18 17:28:20 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 480380] Review Request: python-epdb - extended python debugger
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=480380 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-18 17:33:38 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 480435] Review Request: perl-MooseX-MultiInitArg - Attributes with aliases for constructor arguments
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=480435 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-18 17:34:34 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 469052] Review Request: ris-linux - RIS for Linux - Boot winpe from the net / Ris Windows Installation
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=469052 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #9 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-18 17:32:11 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 467403] Review Request: mingw32-libgpg-error - MinGW Windows GnuPGP error 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=467403 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ke...@tummy.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-18 17:50:55 EDT --- I'd be happy to review this package... the src.rpm link seems to be 503 right now. Is there an updated link I can use? -- 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 478565] Review Request: gupnp-igd - Library to handle UPnP IGD port mapping
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=478565 --- Comment #2 from Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com 2009-01-18 17:53:14 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) Warning: on Fedora branches = 10, the devel package will Require gupnp-devel Yeah, I'm not planning on adding this to any branches = 10. Thanks for the 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 478565] Review Request: gupnp-igd - Library to handle UPnP IGD port mapping
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=478565 Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com 2009-01-18 17:55:25 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: gupnp-igd Short Description: Library to handle UPnP IGD port mapping Owners: bpepple Branches: 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 478769] Review Request: spring-installer - Installer for the Spring game's maps and mods
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=478769 --- Comment #3 from Aurelien Bompard gau...@free.fr 2009-01-18 18:00:27 EDT --- Yeah, I've updated it, but forgot to post the new URL here, sorry about that. I tried to update to the latest version, but it needs a more recent version of ocaml-zip (at least 1.04), so I'll stick with 20081228 if you don't mind. I'll try to find a tarball of 20081228 somewhere you could check for (but that's pretty hard...) -- 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 480552] Review Request: poweradmin - A friendly web-based DNS administration tool for Bert Hubert's PowerDNS server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480552 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ke...@tummy.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-18 18:02:05 EDT --- I'd be happy to review this package. Look for a full review here in a bit. -- 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 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
[Bug 480355] Review Request: mythes-it - Italian 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=480355 Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com 2009-01-18 18:15:26 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mythes-it Short Description: Italian 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 480356] Review Request: mythes-mi - Maori 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=480356 Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com 2009-01-18 18:13:17 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mythes-mi Short Description: Maori 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 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 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
[Bug 480552] Review Request: poweradmin - A friendly web-based DNS administration tool for Bert Hubert's PowerDNS server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480552 --- Comment #2 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-18 18:33:35 EDT --- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (GPLv3+) See below - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: cf83b89c6931160684de52a0b3ea3678 poweradmin-2.1.2.tgz cf83b89c6931160684de52a0b3ea3678 poweradmin-2.1.2.tgz.orig OK - BuildRequires correct - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version Issues: 1. Seems like all the files that refer to the license say or later, so shouldn't this be 'GPLv3+' ? 2. You seem to have a typo in your Source0 line. A 'i' that shouldn't be there. 3. You should probibly require 'httpd' instead of 'webserver' as you are putting files in httpd specific locations. 4. The URL seems wrong... www.poweradmin.org instead of www.poweradmin.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 451298] Review Request: pidgin-msn-pecan - Alternative MSN protocol plugin for libpurple
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=451298 --- Comment #20 from Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com 2009-01-18 19:28:06 EDT --- DEBUG=1 just adds -ggdb to the CFLAGS. If you want to use fedora CFLAGS I suggest you remove DEBUG=1. And maybe V=yes is more understandable. -- 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 480435] Review Request: perl-MooseX-MultiInitArg - Attributes with aliases for constructor arguments
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=480435 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #4 from Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 2009-01-18 20:28:06 EDT --- Thanks for the 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 451298] Review Request: pidgin-msn-pecan - Alternative MSN protocol plugin for libpurple
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=451298 --- Comment #21 from Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br 2009-01-18 21:00:09 EDT --- also fix this issue with rpmlint rpmlint /usr/src/redhat/SRPMS/purple-msn-pecan-0.0.17-3.fc9.src.rpm purple-msn-pecan.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 23, tab: line 1) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 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 199020] Review Request: conexusmm (Gtkmm widgets for the conexus network and serial I/O 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=199020 Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||al...@users.sourceforge.net --- Comment #4 from Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net 2009-01-18 21:06:53 EDT --- Since it appears that the new version of conexus obsoletes conexusmm: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=78660 you need to take the appropriate steps to retire conexusmm, described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/PackageEndOfLife This includes checking in dead.package to the devel branch with an explanation and a request to rel-eng to block conexusmm from rawhide, since it is currently causing broken deps (item 6 in the checklist above): Broken deps for i386 -- conexusmm-0.5.0-6.fc8.i386 requires libpapyrusmm.so.0 conexusmm-devel-0.5.0-6.fc8.i386 requires libpapyrusmm.so.0 (see: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/mash/rawhide-20090118/logs/depcheck ) -- 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 480567] New: Review Request: dnssec-conf - DNSSEC and DLV configuration and priming tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: dnssec-conf - DNSSEC and DLV configuration and priming tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480567 Summary: Review Request: dnssec-conf - DNSSEC and DLV configuration and priming tool Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: p...@xelerance.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: ftp://ftp.xelerance.com/dnssec-conf/dnssec-conf.spec SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.xelerance.com/dnssec-conf/dnssec-conf-1.10-1.src.rpm Description: DNSSEC configuration and priming tool. Keys are required until the root is signed, as well as for local unpublished DNSSEC keys to be preloaded into the recursive nameserver. These DNSSEC configuration files can be directly included in the bind or unbound nameserver configuration files. dnssec-conf includes a commandline configuration client for Bind and Unbound, known DNSSEC keys, URL's to official publication pages of keys, and harvested keys, as well a script to harvest DNSKEY's from DNS. See also: system-config-dnssec (filed seperately for package 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
