[Bug 484644] New: Review Request: screenlets - Fully themeable mini-apps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: screenlets - Fully themeable mini-apps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484644 Summary: Review Request: screenlets - Fully themeable mini-apps Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ma...@linuxed.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp, musur...@gmail.com, felipe.contre...@gmail.com, ita...@ispbrasil.com.br, erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl, jussi.leht...@iki.fi, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Clone Of: 451298 Spec URL: http://www.linuxed.net/~madko/fedora/screenlets.spec SRPM URL: http://www.linuxed.net/~madko/fedora/screenlets-0.1.2-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Screenlets are small owner-drawn applications (written in Python) that can be described as the virtual representation of things lying/standing around on your desk. Sticknotes, clocks, rulers, ... the possibilities are endless. The goal of the Screenlets base-classes is to simplify the creation of fully themeable mini-apps that each solve basic desktop-work-related needs and generally improve the usability and eye-candy of the modern composited Linux-desktop. More info on: http://www.screenlets.org/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480754] Review Request: udev-extras - extra rules and tools for udev
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480754 Harald Hoyer har...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from Harald Hoyer har...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 03:48:16 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: udev-extras New Branches: F-9 Owners: harald -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467376] Review Request: mingw32-pixman - MinGW Windows Pixman library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467376 --- Comment #15 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 04:00:23 EDT --- Just to note that a COPYING file was added to pixman: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19582 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 --- Comment #26 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 04:09:44 EDT --- (In reply to comment #24) OK... I gotcha. Restarted plasma and the icons completely disappered. Leaving only a list of Languages in the picker and how the program labels the country codes. Let the review begin. Ok, so I think finish it now - the question is maintenance of this patched package... (In reply to comment #25) Jaroslav... OK... I gotta ask a maybe dumb question. I can wait if it is required. I'm only asking because of the frequency of activity and what seems to be a slow down in it. Since you submitted the last set of changes; does that mean that somebody else should conduct the review? Anyone can assist this review but assigned person should finish the review. Reviews could be really slow process - I'm waiting for one review months, in other review I'm waiting for packager months... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467421] Review Request: mingw32-gtk-vnc - MinGW Windows port of VNC client GTK widget
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467421 --- Comment #7 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 04:21:11 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mingw32-gtk-vnc Short Description: MinGW Windows port of VNC client GTK widget Owners: rjones berrange Branches: EL-5 F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467421] Review Request: mingw32-gtk-vnc - MinGW Windows port of VNC client GTK widget
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467421 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 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 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 --- Comment #27 from Eli Wapniarski e...@orbsky.homelinux.org 2009-02-09 04:29:24 EDT --- Understood. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484374] Review Request: mythes-uk - Ukrainian 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=484374 Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 04:41:31 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mythes-uk Short Description: Ukrainian 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 484372] Review Request: mythes-ca - Catalan 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=484372 --- Comment #2 from Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 04:49:30 EDT --- We have 0.5.1-beta at http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/project/thesaurus-ca which refers to the same .oxt so it seems safest to mark it as 0.5.1-0.1.beta -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484372] Review Request: mythes-ca - Catalan 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=484372 Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 04:55:49 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mythes-ca Short Description: Catalan 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 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229 Eli Wapniarski e...@orbsky.homelinux.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||e...@orbsky.homelinux.org AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|e...@orbsky.homelinux.org --- Comment #20 from Eli Wapniarski e...@orbsky.homelinux.org 2009-02-09 05:41:47 EDT --- NON SHOW STOPPERS - 1) Not a show stopper, but, I had to grab rb_libtorrent-0.14.1-2 from koji so that I could rebuild on Fedora 10. I don't have Fedora 11 alpha. 2) When rebuilding both rb_libtorrent and qbtorrent from within Konsole the compiling seems to chew up a lot of system resources. From runlevel 3 both rebuilt in a reasonable amount of time. I have no idea if this is a problem with KDE, qt, cmake, gcc... If somebody could help figure this out, it would be great. SHOW STOPPER - In the Preferences dialog box under languages, country flags appear. They need to be removed to conform to Fedora packaging guidelines. If someone knows how to create a patch to remove them it would be good. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483301] Review Request: muse - Midi/Audio Music Sequencer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483301 David Kovalsky dkova...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dkova...@redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483543] Review Request: systemtapguiserver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483543 --- Comment #6 from Anithra anit...@linux.vnet.ibm.com 2009-02-09 05:48:21 EDT --- Spec URL: http://nchc.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/stapgui/systemtapguiserver.spec SRPM URL: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/stapgui/systemtapguiserver-1.0-3.src.rpm Added license text and README -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481141] Review Request: pycryptsetup - Python bindings for cryptsetup 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=481141 Martin Sivák msi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #10 from Martin Sivák msi...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 05:56:53 EDT --- Ah, thanks, will do -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229 --- Comment #21 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com 2009-02-09 06:20:42 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=331303) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=331303) Patch to remove flags from the preferences menu -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 466906] Review Request: perl-NOCpulse-SetID - Provides api for correctly changing user identity
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466906 Miroslav Suchy msu...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481192] Review Request: perl-pgsql_perl5 - Pg - Perl5 extension for PostgreSQL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481192 --- Comment #6 from Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br 2009-02-09 06:24:44 EDT --- please hold, I will update this ticket as soon as 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 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 #21 from Dodji Seketeli do...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 06:24:07 EDT --- I sent the patches to upstream. I am waiting for comments. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229 --- Comment #22 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com 2009-02-09 06:29:07 EDT --- Here are the new SRPM Spec file Spec URL: http://dnmouse.org/fedora/qbittorrent_review/review_changes/new_4/qbittorrent.spec SRPM URL: http://dnmouse.org/fedora/qbittorrent_review/review_changes/new_4/qbittorrent-1.3.1-7.fc10.src.rpm patch URL: http://dnmouse.org/fedora/qbittorrent_review/review_changes/new_4/qbittorrent_flag.patch -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 --- Comment #28 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 06:36:50 EDT --- Latest SPEC/SRPM files Spec URL: http://rezza.hofyland.cz/fedora/packages/kde-plasma-translatoid/kde-plasma-translatoid.spec SRPM URL: http://rezza.hofyland.cz/fedora/packages/kde-plasma-translatoid/kde-plasma-translatoid-0.4.1-6.fc10.src.rpm Patch URL: http://rezza.hofyland.cz/fedora/packages/kde-plasma-translatoid/kde-plasma-translatoid-ban-flags.patch As this is simple package, quick review: - rpmlint output clean - OK - country flags removed - OK (see comments #19, #24) - SPEC file - OK - trademarks - OK - koji scratch build (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1114840) - OK So for me package looks OK but I'll rather wait for comment on countries flags issue. Let me ask on fedora-kde list. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229 --- Comment #23 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com 2009-02-09 06:39:47 EDT --- (In reply to comment #20) NON SHOW STOPPERS - 1) Not a show stopper, but, I had to grab rb_libtorrent-0.14.1-2 from koji so that I could rebuild on Fedora 10. I don't have Fedora 11 alpha. 2) When rebuilding both rb_libtorrent and qbtorrent from within Konsole the compiling seems to chew up a lot of system resources. From runlevel 3 both rebuilt in a reasonable amount of time. I have no idea if this is a problem with KDE, qt, cmake, gcc... If somebody could help figure this out, it would be great. SHOW STOPPER - In the Preferences dialog box under languages, country flags appear. They need to be removed to conform to Fedora packaging guidelines. If someone knows how to create a patch to remove them it would be good. I have removed the flags :) , I have also noticed that it takes a lot of ram to compile rb_libtorrent and qbittorrent. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484373] Review Request: mythes-es - Spanish 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=484373 --- Comment #2 from Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 06:49:04 EDT --- Its fairly common for linguistic stuff like dictionaries and thesauri to be updated very frequently especially the ones that work with the OpenThesaurus user-submissions mechanism where a new tarball gets generated if there have been any new additions since the previous spin. The same situation arises for the mythes-de one for example. I can add a line to the spec if that helps clarify it, e.g. #OpenThesaurus reuses the download url for new tarballs if new submissions are accepted -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484373] Review Request: mythes-es - Spanish 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=484373 manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-02-09 07:06:26 EDT --- If you cannot persuade upstream to use a sane versioning system for the tarball names, please do include an explanation in the spec 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 474549] Review Request: ca-cacert.org - CAcert.org CA root certificates
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474549 --- Comment #7 from Matthias Saou matth...@rpmforge.net 2009-02-09 07:10:43 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) Matthias: Do you have any official response from the cacert support mailinglist yet? The last feedback was what I posted here, that it was work-in-progress to get the situation fixed. If you have any further news and/or want to get in touch again with cacert about this, please post any info here! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225797] Review Request: gimp-data-extras
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225797
--- Comment #15 from Nils Philippsen nphil...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 07:09:29
EDT ---
Sorry for the delay...
(In reply to comment #13)
I can verify that this does indeed build fine with the first line changed to
%define gimpdatadir %(%{_bindir}/gimptool --gimpdatadir || echo blah)
Everything that follows assumes that a similar change has been made.
I've added this workaround.
However, I guess it's worth asking what that dependency does that the regular
dependency on gimp doesn't do. We really try to avoid file dependencies out
of
a few specific directories because they require the users to download
additional large hunks of metadata.
Agreed. The package now requires gimp = 2:2.0 and I've dropped the dependency
on the directory.
Why is the release 1? It doesn't seem to me that the 2.0.2 tarball upstream
is any kind of prerelease.
Uh, that's because I'm a stickler for eye-pleasing and I wanted to reserve the
-1 release for the version to import into Fedora CVS.
Unfortunately I can't find any statement of the license version in use.
COPYING is simply v2 of the GPL, which has the usual language about being able
to use any version if the program itself doesn't specify one. That would
indicate that GPL+ is the appropriate license tag, but it would be a good idea
to clarify with upstream because I don't think that's what they intend.
I've checked with upstream and they told me I should consider it as GPLv2+.
There's a new version in the works which will hopefully clearly mention the
license directly in the archive.
* source files match upstream. sha256sum:
31f9b40822646729be9ff50856e803a59290c119c600a8fdab4b669c4ccf2c1f
gimp-data-extras-2.0.2.tar.bz2
X does not meet versioning guidelines.
OK if I bump it to -1 prior to importing? That leaves us -0.x for review
work
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
? license field matches the actual license.
I can attach an IRC log snippet if necessary.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* rpmlint is silent.
final provides and requires:
gimp-data-extras = 2.0.2-0.1.fc11
=
? /usr/share/gimp/2.0
gimp
Resolved by directly requiring gimp = 2:2.0 I think...
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no generically named files
* acceptable content
New files:
Spec file: http://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/gimp-data-extras.spec
SRPM file:
http://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/gimp-data-extras-2.0.2-0.2.fc10.src.rpm
--
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 484373] Review Request: mythes-es - Spanish 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=484373 Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 07:11:59 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mythes-es Short Description: Spanish 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 471003] Review Request: cabal-install - Haskell package utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471003 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||446451 --- Comment #5 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 06:58:57 EDT --- ping anyone? :) It would be really good to get this into F11 - it is the rubygems of the Haskell world. :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229 --- Comment #24 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-02-09 07:32:28 EDT --- It's C++. Compiling C++ is more resource hungry than e.g. compiling C. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229 --- Comment #25 from Eli Wapniarski e...@orbsky.homelinux.org 2009-02-09 07:40:50 EDT --- Thanks for the info Michael, but it still shouldn't make my computer come to a screeching halt compiling inside Konsole. I've got a 1 gig system on an x86_64. Things should be reasonable, but they aren't. Leigh... OK... I can confirm that the flags have been removed from the compiled program. I will continue with the review. I will do my level best to get it done as quickly as I am able. This is going to be my first review so please be a little patient with me as I want to get this right. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu --- Comment #29 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2009-02-09 07:40:35 EDT --- the flags in source is ok, afaik. We simply don't want them *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 479803] Review Request: cabal2spec - generates spec files for Haskell packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479803 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: cabal2spec |Review Request: cabal2spec |- generates spec files for |- generates spec files for |Haskell packages (was: |Haskell packages |haskell-packaging) | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479803] Review Request: cabal2spec - generates spec files for Haskell packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479803 --- Comment #9 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 07:54:22 EDT --- This is the changelog: * Mon Feb 9 2009 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com - 0.5-1 - add cabal2spec-diff script to diff current spec against current template - add ghc-doc BR to binlib and lib templates -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479803] Review Request: cabal2spec - generates spec files for Haskell packages (was: haskell-packaging)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479803 --- Comment #8 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 07:52:52 EDT --- Spec URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal2spec/cabal2spec.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal2spec/cabal2spec-0.5-1.fc10.src.rpm Noarch: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal2spec/cabal2spec-0.5-1.fc10.noarch.rpm I dunno how long it will be before FPC revisits the Haskell Guidelines. (I guess I need to submit it formally after the initial RFC.) Maybe we can just complete this review and then make any updates later as appropriate? It would be good to have this included in F11 anyway IMHO. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229 --- Comment #26 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com 2009-02-09 08:03:03 EDT --- (In reply to comment #25) Thanks for the info Michael, but it still shouldn't make my computer come to a screeching halt compiling inside Konsole. I've got a 1 gig system on an x86_64. Things should be reasonable, but they aren't. I had to add another 1Gb or RAM to my machine (2Gb total) as some of the compiling processes take in excess of 700Mb , this forces the PC to start using the swap space (hence the machine runs slower) Leigh... OK... I can confirm that the flags have been removed from the compiled program. I will continue with the review. I will do my level best to get it done as quickly as I am able. This is going to be my first review so please be a little patient with me as I want to get this right. No problem :cool: Here are the build logs from mock for Rawhide if it helps. i386 buildlogs URL: http://leigh123.homelinux.com/Rawhide/i386/ x86_64 buildlogs URL: http://leigh123.homelinux.com/Rawhide/x86_64/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #26 from Justin Zygmont solarflo...@gmail.com 2009-02-09
08:06:32 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #21)
(In reply to comment #20)
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.
* Dosemu 1.4.0 (1.4.0 is the version you declared) has already been released.
So the one you are packaging is a post-release snapshot version and it must
follow this guideline:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages
Therefore 1868svn in the release tag is not acceptable. Release Tag for
Post-Release Snapshot Packages is %{X}.%{alphatag}. In this syntax, %{X} is
the release number increment and %{alphatag} is the checkout string.
Well, the best I could do to figure what it should be was to look at other spec
files and try to guess, so lets see if this is ok now.
* You are still not updating the changelog after each release. This is wrong.
I
already told you. In this way we cannot read the history of the package.
no, this is the first RPM so it would make no sense why I need to update the
changelog at this point, all I have done is corrected the spec file to try and
get it released in the first place.
* desktop-file-install \
--vendor=fedora \
--dir=${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_datadir}/applications \
%{SOURCE2}
You must not use a vendor. Please read:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/TomCallaway/DesktopFileVendor
ok, removed.
* Categories=System;Emulator;
The Categories in the desktop file should be changed to Game;Emulator;. This
is what other emulators use.
I didnt want this to be a game category because its not just a game emulator,
its a dos emulator, but I have changed it anyways.
* Source: %{name}-%{version}.tgz
Source1: %{name}-freedos-bin.tgz
Source is missing full URL (which is OK because this is a snapshot package)
but
you are not following the guidelines on how to create the snapshot.
Full URL for Source1 is missing.
More info about both issues here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL
You told me before forget the source URL, you just wanted to know why I was
packaging a SVN release,
* BuildRequires: binutils
This is not required. This dependency is already pulled in by default.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
* BuildRequires: bison flex
For constituency with other BR's, please split the above in two lines.
Thats done now.
* You are still not following the guidelines about licensing. There are parts
that are not covered by the GPL. You must identify those parts and understand
under what licences they are.
After that you must update the License tag accordingly.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios
I tried, from the information I have available.
* I cannot build the rpm ATM, but it seems to me that the following problems
where not addressed:
- RPM_OPT_FLAGS are not used.
I dont know of any opt flags needed, I remember going over all this stuff, and
its not because I just dont know anything,
- Text files are not UTF-8.
rpmlint only reported certain files needed to be converted, I dont know that I
have to convert every file to UTF now.
I've uploaded the updated files to the place listed above at fedorapeople.org,
I fixed everything I could find, so in case there are still small errors, its
not because I didnt bother to read the guidelines, its easy to see who wrote
the docs knows everything about it.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199154] Review Request: Slony-1 (postgresql-slony-engine)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=199154 --- Comment #55 from Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br 2009-02-09 08:07:38 EDT --- try to build with this. %if %docs -BuildRequires: docbook-style-dsssl postgresql_autodoc +BuildRequires: docbook-style-dsssl postgresql_autodoc docbook-utils %endif http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1115000 -- 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 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 #27 from Justin Zygmont solarflo...@gmail.com 2009-02-09 08:09:42 EDT --- (In reply to comment #24) Justin? What's the status of this? Well, I fixed everything I could in the last few days, so we'll see how far it gets this time. The rpms work, i'm using them now. Thanks for the help. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468189] Review Request: rear - Relax and Recovery (disaster recovery framework)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468189 --- Comment #21 from Gratien D'haese gratien.dha...@it3.be 2009-02-09 08:14:21 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=331310) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=331310) Validation output of rear-1.7.15 package wrote a script to automate the validation process of a rear package. In this way we're using a consistent way of testing any updates on the 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 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 #28 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-02-09 08:23:17 EDT --- Good work, I'm sure the reviewer will be much more happy about the package now :o) (In reply to comment #26) no, this is the first RPM so it would make no sense why I need to update the changelog at this point, all I have done is corrected the spec file to try and get it released in the first place. Well, reviewers like to compare to the previous version of the package they were reviewing, and bumping Release and adding %changelog makes them happy :) * Categories=System;Emulator; The Categories in the desktop file should be changed to Game;Emulator;. This is what other emulators use. I didnt want this to be a game category because its not just a game emulator, its a dos emulator, but I have changed it anyways. Please revert back, this is a violation of the Desktop Menu Specification. I'm sure this is minor enough not to bother you (see comment #24). - RPM_OPT_FLAGS are not used. I dont know of any opt flags needed, I remember going over all this stuff, and its not because I just dont know anything, Please have a look at the guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags Just in case you missed anything else there, please make sure that you're familiar with the whole guidelines. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468189] Review Request: rear - Relax and Recovery (disaster recovery framework)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468189 --- Comment #22 from Gratien D'haese gratien.dha...@it3.be 2009-02-09 08:24:16 EDT --- NEXT ACTIONS: 1/ still need a full review of the package by an approved package maintainer 2/ still need to find a sponsor for myself (see next message to candidate sponsors) Message to (candidate) sponsors: We have been involved with the following bug reports: * Full reviews made for: 187318 Fedora Package Review NEW medium Review Request: mondo 473835 Fedora Package Review NEW medium Review Request: autoarchive - Simple backup tool 480851 Fedora Package Review NEW medium Review Request: ccrypt - Secure encryption and decryption of files and streams * Involved with comments for: 463035 Fedora Package Review NEW medium Review Request: pyroman - Very fast firewall configuration tool 473184 Fedora Package Review NEW medium Review Request: clamz - Amazon Downloader 474802 Fedora Package Review NEW medium Review Request: vacation - Automatic mail answering program New release of Relax and Recover (rear) is available: Spec URL: http://home.scarlet.be/gdha/rear.spec SRPM URL: http://home.scarlet.be/gdha/rear-1.7.15-1.fc9.src.rpm RPM URL: http://home.scarlet.be/gdha/rear-1.7.15-1.fc9.noarch.rpm b2d1bb5591884dbd39565af24f1287c9 rear-1.7.15-1.fc9.src.rpm SourceForge pages of development version 1.7.15: https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=171835package_id=287824release_id=659729 I do not want to overload the bug report. therefore, I added the validation output as an attachment to the report. Thanks, Gratien -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452427] Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome floating and tiling window 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=452427 Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||michel.syl...@gmail.com --- Comment #41 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com 2009-02-09 08:33:50 EDT --- Does not build on Rawhide x86_64: -- checking for modules 'libev;glib-2.0;cairo;pango;pangocairo;x11-xcb;xcb-randr;xcb-xinerama;xcb-event=0.3.0;xcb-aux=0.3.0;xcb-atom=0.3.0;xcb-keysyms=0.3.0;xcb-icccm=0.3.0;cairo-xcb;xproto=7.0.11;imlib2' -- package 'cairo-xcb' not found -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #29 from Andrea Musuruane musur...@gmail.com 2009-02-09 08:33:44 EDT --- (In reply to comment #28) * Categories=System;Emulator; The Categories in the desktop file should be changed to Game;Emulator;. This is what other emulators use. I didnt want this to be a game category because its not just a game emulator, its a dos emulator, but I have changed it anyways. Please revert back, this is a violation of the Desktop Menu Specification. I'm sure this is minor enough not to bother you (see comment #24). Please do not say inaccurate things! Categories=Game;Emulator; is as legit as Categories=System;Emulator; http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/menu-spec-1.0.html#category-registry Additional Category Description Related Categories Emulator Emulator of another platform, such as a DOS emulator System or Game If you want to discuss this further, please let us move this particular discussion in the Fedora devel ML. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484287] Review Request: xconvers - Ham radio convers client similar to IRC for X/GTK
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484287 Randall Berry randyn3...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 471003] Review Request: cabal-install - Haskell package utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471003 --- Comment #6 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 08:56:23 EDT --- I rebuilt (updated) ghc-zlib - so that it installs correctly and this should actually build again now on rawhide (oops!): http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1115148 As soon as ghc-6.10.1 has been pushed to f10-updates I will build ghc-zlib and ghc-HTTP there too. Spec URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal-install/cabal-install.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/cabal-install/cabal-install-0.6.0-3.fc10.src.rpm (just fixed the URL field) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484359] Review Request: gtksourcecompletion - Completion support for GtkSourceView
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484359 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||rjo...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rjo...@redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484360] Review Request: vtg - Vala Toys for gEdit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484360 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||rjo...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rjo...@redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484359] Review Request: gtksourcecompletion - Completion support for GtkSourceView
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484359
Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 09:14:55
EDT ---
Some general comments first ...
find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -name '*.la' -exec rm -f {} ';'
can be replaced by:
find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -name '*.la' -delete
The license file issue should be raised upstream. Just
adding a link to a mailing list message into the spec
file should be sufficient.
More comments follow ...
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484359] Review Request: gtksourcecompletion - Completion support for GtkSourceView
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484359 --- Comment #2 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 09:15:38 EDT --- rpmlint output: gtksourcecompletion-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation gtksourcecompletion-doc.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long The gtksourcecompletion-doc package contains documentation for gtksourcecompletion. 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. The no-documentation warning is OK temporarily until we resolve the license issue. description-line-too-long should be corrected. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452427] Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome floating and tiling window 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=452427 --- Comment #42 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 09:23:23 EDT --- (In reply to comment #41) Does not build on Rawhide x86_64: Does not build on any Fedora. See bug 465759. You have to enable XCB backend in Cairo yourself to build at all. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484359] Review Request: gtksourcecompletion - Completion support for GtkSourceView
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484359 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(michel.syl...@gma ||il.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 484359] Review Request: gtksourcecompletion - Completion support for GtkSourceView
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484359
--- Comment #3 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 09:24:40
EDT ---
- rpmlint output
See comment 2.
+ package name satisfies the packaging naming guidelines
Yes, but the very loose standards of Fedora. cf. gtksourceview
+ specfile name matches the package base name
+ package should satisfy packaging guidelines
+ license meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora
Real license is LGPLv2+. COPYING file needs updating as mentioned
in comment 1.
+ license matches the actual package license
- %doc includes license file
See comment 1.
+ spec file written in American English
+ spec file is legible
+ upstream sources match sources in the srpm
b031896ce03bef4ca711f9b1e0a34544 / 431699
+ package successfully builds on at least one architecture
x86_64
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires list all build dependencies
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1115220
+ %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/*
+ binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and %postun
+ does not use Prefix: /usr
+ package owns all directories it creates
+ no duplicate files in %files
+ %defattr line
+ %clean contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ consistent use of macros
+ package must contain code or permissible content
+ large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ files marked %doc should not affect package
+ header files should be in -devel
n/a static libraries should be in -static
+ packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig'
+ libfoo.so must go in -devel
+ -devel must require the fully versioned base
+ packages should not contain libtool .la files
n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages
+ %install must start with rm -rf %{buildroot} etc.
+ filenames must be valid UTF-8
Optional:
? if there is no license file, packager should query upstream
see comment 1
n/a translations of description and summary for non-English languages, if
available
+ reviewer should build the package in mock
+ the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures
- review should test the package functions as described
+ scriptlets should be sane
+ pkgconfig files should go in -devel
+ shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or
/usr/sbin
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483205] Review Request: eclipse-systemtapgui - GUI interface for SystemTap
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483205
--- Comment #22 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 09:21:59
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #20)
(In reply to comment #19)
Anithra: on the website there is a screenshot showing graphing. Is that
functionality included here? Does it use Draw2D, GEF, BIRT, or something
else?
graphing functionality is included, it uses eclipse-swt
Okay, I wouldn't have guessed that, but cool :)
not sure if that needs
to be included in BuildRequires , added it anyway.
It's not because it'll be brought in by eclipse-{platform,pde,jdt,etc.}.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484674] python-dns not available in EPEL4
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484674 Jon Stanley jonstan...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|j...@ocjtech.us -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484674] python-dns not available in EPEL4
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484674 Jon Stanley jonstan...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fedora-package-rev...@redha ||t.com, ||jonstan...@gmail.com, ||nott...@redhat.com Component|python-dns |Package Review Version|el4 |rawhide AssignedTo|j...@ocjtech.us |nob...@fedoraproject.org Product|Fedora EPEL |Fedora -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484676] Review Request: eclipse-dtp - Eclipse Data Tools Platform
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484676 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||477870 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477870] Review Request: eclipse-emf - Eclipse Modeling Framework (EMF) Eclipse plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477870 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||484676 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484676] New: Review Request: eclipse-dtp - Eclipse Data Tools Platform
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: eclipse-dtp - Eclipse Data Tools Platform https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484676 Summary: Review Request: eclipse-dtp - Eclipse Data Tools Platform Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: akurt...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-dtp.spec SRPM URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-dtp-1.6.1-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: The Eclipse Data Tools Platform provides extensible frameworks and exemplary tools, enabling a diverse set of plug-in offerings specific to particular data-centric technologies and supported by the DTP ecosystem. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484674] python-dns not available in EPEL4
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484674 Jeffrey C. Ollie j...@ocjtech.us changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Component|Package Review |python-dns Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #1 from Jeffrey C. Ollie j...@ocjtech.us 2009-02-09 09:33:21 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: python-dns New Branches: EL-4 Owners: jcollie -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484360] Review Request: vtg - Vala Toys for gEdit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484360
Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review?,
||needinfo?(michel.syl...@gma
||il.com)
--- Comment #1 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 09:33:13
EDT ---
First some general comments:
I've done some vala packages before and they were all named
vala-* or *-vala. eg. bug 214227, bug 454668, vala-tools, etc.
I suspect we need Vala-specific packaging guidelines in this area.
vscsymbolcompletion.c:63:38: error: vala/valastructvaluetype.h:
No such file or directory
We are missing a dependency somehow. vala-devel package does
not have this header file. It helps if you could do a Koji
scratch build of your package, since that will ensure that all
missing BRs have been found.
koji build --scratch dist-f11 yourpackage.src.rpm
%setup -q -n vtg-%{version}
-n argument not required here (but will be if the package gets
a different name ...)
%configure --docdir=%{_datadir}/doc/%{name}-%{version}
Is this right? I would have written: --docdir=%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
%doc %{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version}
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481732] Review Request: stardict-english-czech - czech dictionary for stardict
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481732 --- Comment #10 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-02-09 09:45:04 EDT --- Petr: ping. Alive? :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lkund...@v3.sk Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #30 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-02-09 09:41:50 EDT --- Taking this for official review. Justin: until I do it, please address the remaining Andrea's concerns (optflags) except for the Category=Game nonsense :) I'm reasonably satisfied with your packaging abilities, so am willing to sponsor you once you follow the existing practice and do preliminary reviews of some other packages. See comment #5. 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 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229 --- Comment #27 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com 2009-02-09 09:52:03 EDT --- Buildlogs for the F11 rawhide 1.3.1-7 build i386 buildlogs URL: http://leigh123.homelinux.com/Rawhide/i386/new_1/ x86_64 buildlogs URL: http://leigh123.homelinux.com/Rawhide/x86_64/new_1/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483205] Review Request: eclipse-systemtapgui - GUI interface for SystemTap
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483205
--- Comment #23 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 09:53:33
EDT ---
Okay, here's the review. Just 3 small things and we'll be good to go (lines
beginning with non-* need attention; others are fine and just listed for
brevity). Thanks!
X BuildRequires are proper
- do we need a BR/R on SystemTap itself? What about kernel-devel?
X make sure lines are = 80 characters
- please wrap line 29 (the pdebuild call) with '\' characters
? macros fine
- it would be nice if you s/$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{buildroot}/ but it's not the
end of the world
* package is named appropriately
* it is legal for Fedora to distribute this
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* specfile name matches %{name}
* md5sum matches upstream
* skim the summary and description for typos, etc.
* correct buildroot
* %{?dist} used correctly
* license text included in package and marked with %doc
* packages meets FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/)
* rpmlint on this package.srpm gives no output
* changelog format okay
* Summary tag does not end in a period
* no PreReq
* specfile is legible
* package successfully compiles and builds on x86_64 (but is correctly noarch)
* summary and description fine
* specfile written in American English
* no -doc sub-package necessary
* not native, so no rpath, static linking, etc.
* no config files
* not a GUI app
* no -devel necessary
* install section begins with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot}
* no translations so no locale handling
* no Requires(pre,post)
* package not relocatable
* package contains code
* package owns all directories and files
* no %files duplicates
* file permissions fine
* %clean present
* %doc files do not affect runtime
* not a web app
* verify the final provides and requires of the binary RPMs
- these look good to me
* run rpmlint on the binary RPMs = no output
* package includes license text in the package and marks it with %doc
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484323] Review Request: perl-KinoSearch - Search engine 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=484323 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||lkund...@v3.sk AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lkund...@v3.sk Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-02-09 09:58:30 EDT --- Hah, I just need this todaym Ian, I owe you a beer. Taking it for a 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 484359] Review Request: gtksourcecompletion - Completion support for GtkSourceView
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484359 Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(michel.syl...@gma | |il.com) | --- Comment #4 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com 2009-02-09 10:13:01 EDT --- To clarify, these are the remaining issues: - wrong copying file included in tarball: is this a blocker, and could I just bundle the correct COPYING and COPYING.LIB files from the FSF? - package naming: should this ideally be gtksourceview2-completion, GtkSourceCompletion, or something else? - functionality review: the vtg demo should allow this to be tested: http://vtg.googlecode.com/svn/wiki/screencasts/vtg-demo-1.ogg -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484360] Review Request: vtg - Vala Toys for gEdit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484360 Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(michel.syl...@gma | |il.com) | --- Comment #2 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com 2009-02-09 10:20:03 EDT --- $ rpm -qf /usr/include/vala-1.0/vala/valastructvaluetype.h vala-devel-0.5.6-1.fc11.x86_64 The file is in 0.5.6 which is in updates-testing. Unfortunately, I can't do a Koji build until gtksourcecompletion lands. %setup: I put the -n because I'm not sure about the name either. vala-vtg or gedit-vtg? I'd say gedit-vala, since it seems safe to assume the project will be gedit-specific. Thoughts? docdir: agreed, thanks. Let me know which name seems preferable and I'll update the spec. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484323] Review Request: perl-KinoSearch - Search engine 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=484323 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||182235 --- Comment #2 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-02-09 10:23:38 EDT --- 0.) This is redundant: Requires: perl(Compress::Zlib) It gets added by the auroreq generator. 1.) rpmlint: perl-KinoSearch.i386: E: zero-length /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/KinoSearch/KinoSearch.bs 2.) License: I'm worried about this, and am blocking the review until it is solved. The perldoc reads: Terms of usage for Apache Lucene, from which portions of KinoSearch are derived, are spelled out in the Apache License: see the file ApacheLicense2.0.txt. While the original code is licensed GPL+ or Artistic. If my understanding of things is correct, we can't choose GPL since it does not permit redistribution when linked with ASL code and we can't choose Artistic either, since it's incompatible with Fedora. I think a clarification and eventually and addition of exception to allow linking with ASL from upstream would be good here. IANAL, I might be completely wrong. Adding spot to CC, he may provide valuable advice. In other respects, the package is perfect: - SPEC file clean and legible - Builds in mock, obeys compiler flags - rpmlint is mostly quiet (see 1.) - requires/provides (mostly, see 0.) sane - ASL license 2.0 text included (heh...) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484359] Review Request: gtksourcecompletion - Completion support for GtkSourceView
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484359 --- Comment #5 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 10:22:27 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) To clarify, these are the remaining issues: - wrong copying file included in tarball: is this a blocker, and could I just bundle the correct COPYING and COPYING.LIB files from the FSF? This is not a blocker. Just post about it on an upstream mailing list, and then add the URL of that posting as a comment eg in the spec file, just so we know what is happening. - package naming: should this ideally be gtksourceview2-completion, GtkSourceCompletion, or something else? Package name is OK according to the guidelines, it's just that I personally think the guidelines are rather weak. Again, this is not a blocker. - functionality review: the vtg demo should allow this to be tested: http://vtg.googlecode.com/svn/wiki/screencasts/vtg-demo-1.ogg I can't build vtg yet unfortunately, but I will try this when it builds. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484360] Review Request: vtg - Vala Toys for gEdit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484360 --- Comment #3 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 10:28:58 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) $ rpm -qf /usr/include/vala-1.0/vala/valastructvaluetype.h vala-devel-0.5.6-1.fc11.x86_64 The file is in 0.5.6 which is in updates-testing. Unfortunately, I can't do a Koji build until gtksourcecompletion lands. OK got this update. Now I get this error: No translations found for vtg in /home/rjones/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/vtg-0.3.2-1.fc10.x86_64 Sorry, I'm having to do this on Fedora 10 because my Rawhide machine has popped its clogs. %setup: I put the -n because I'm not sure about the name either. vala-vtg or gedit-vtg? I'd say gedit-vala, since it seems safe to assume the project will be gedit-specific. Thoughts? Personally I don't care - it's something that might need to be raised with packaging committee though. In any case it's not a blocking issue. docdir: agreed, thanks. Let me know which name seems preferable and I'll update the spec. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226493] Merge Review: tix
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226493 --- Comment #5 from Vitezslav Crhonek vcrho...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 10:28:47 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) I would like to take this review. My interest in tix comes from the python side and it is always nice to have one more merge review finished. :-) Thanks for taking it. I noticed the open review since comment #3 but I have been busy meanwhile. Sorry. :-) The first standard question regarding this issue is the output of rpmlint over the produced rpms: tix.i686: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/ld.so.conf.d/tix-i386.conf As you said, this is OK (it's not real config file). tix.i686: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib/tcl8.5/Tix8.4.3/pref/WmDefault.tcl Hm, WmDefault.tcl is used as module if I understand it correctly, so missing shebang is OK, but it's probably also OK to remove executable permission... But I don't know much about it (only what's written in WmDefault.txt), so what do you think? tix.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch1: tix-8.4.2-tcl8.5.patch tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm Fixed. /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/tlist/twofont.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/container/notebook.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/intro/combo.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/intro/hierarchy.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/filesel/dirlist.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/tlist/relation.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/hlist/dirtree.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/container/sl-bar.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/filesel/exfile.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/oop/arrows.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/intro/select1.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/container/pane_vert.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/tlist/widgets.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/intro/law_comp.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/hlist/hlist_ex3.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/tlist/tlist.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/tix32.png tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/container/sl-nobar.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/ARROWS.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/hlist/hlist_ex1.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/hierarchy.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/container/pane_horz.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/filesel/dirtree.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/intro/lawyer.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/tlist/horizontal.gif Fixed. tix-doc.i686: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/Release-8.4.0.txt Fixed. tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/filesel/fb_comp.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/intro/ctl_wopt.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/intro/select-vert.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/hlist/hlist_ex2.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/tlist/joe.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/hierarchy.png tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/intro/ctl_subw.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/container/pane_add.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/tlist/vertical.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/tix-doc-8.4.3/html/gif/tix/tix32.gif tix-doc.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm
[Bug 484676] Review Request: eclipse-dtp - Eclipse Data Tools Platform
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484676
Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||overh...@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 10:31:51
EDT ---
A few minor things:
- please set the fedora-review flag to ?
- change the Requires: on java to be = (or maybe '='?) 1.5.0
- I prefer to add a short name after dropins:
%files
%{eclipse_dropin} = %{eclipse_dropin}/dtp
- please add a comment above the sed line getting rid of the sun.misc.Compare
- should we add some comment(s) stating why we're only building the features we
are?
And the rest of the review (lines beginning with X need attention; those
beginning with * are okay):
X verify the final provides and requires of the binary RPMs
- other than the java one, things look good
X make sure lines are = 80 characters
- could you add some line continuations to fix this?
X package successfully compiles and builds
- is this expected?
[javac] 4. ERROR in
/home/overholt/rpmbuild/BUILD/dtp-1.6.1/build/plugins/org.eclipse.datatools.connectivity.oda.design/src/org/eclipse/datatools/connectivity/oda/design/impl/InputElementUIHintsImpl.java
[javac] (at line 112)
[javac] assert (eContainer() instanceof InputElementAttributes);
[javac] ^^
[javac] The method assert(boolean) is undefined for the type
InputElementUIHintsImpl
* BuildRequires are proper
* macros fine
* package is named appropriately
* it is legal for Fedora to distribute this
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* specfile name matches %{name}
* md5sum matches upstream
- not applicable
- other than timestamps, my generated tarball matches the one in the SRPM
* skim the summary and description for typos, etc.
* summary and description good
- the description is a bit vague but it is what upstream provides, so ...
* correct buildroot
* %{?dist} used correctly
* license text included in package and marked with %doc
* packages meets FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/)
* rpmlint on this package.srpm gives no output
* changelog format okay
* Summary tag does not end in a period
* no PreReq
* specfile is legible
* specfile written in American English
* no -doc sub-package necessary
* not native, so no rpath, static linking, etc.
* no config files
* not a GUI app
* no -devel necessary
* install section begins with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot}
* no translations so no locale handling
* no Requires(pre,post)
* package not relocatable
* package contains code
* package owns all directories and files
* no %files duplicates
* file permissions fine
* %clean present
* %doc files do not affect runtime
* not a web app
* run rpmlint on the binary RPMs = no output
* package includes license text in the package and marks it with %doc
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483301] Review Request: muse - Midi/Audio Music Sequencer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483301 Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED CC||ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org Resolution|DEFERRED| --- Comment #10 from Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org 2009-02-09 10:35:00 EDT --- Reopening, invalidly closed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483301] Review Request: muse - Midi/Audio Music Sequencer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483301
--- Comment #11 from Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org 2009-02-09 10:37:20
EDT ---
FYI, a good solution to get rid of unwanted Provides for plugins and only those
is the one we're using in XChat:
# do not Provide plugins .so
%define _use_internal_dependency_generator 0
%{__cat} \EOF %{name}.prov
#!%{_buildshell}
%{__grep} -v %{_docdir} - | %{__find_provides} $* \
| %{__sed} '/\.so$/d'
EOF
%define __find_provides %{_builddir}/%{name}-%{version}/%{name}.prov
%{__chmod} +x %{__find_provides}
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467420] Review Request: mingw32-gtk2 - MinGW Windows Gtk2 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=467420
Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+,
||needinfo?(rjo...@redhat.com
||)
--- Comment #7 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com
2009-02-09 10:49:38 EDT ---
MUST:
? rpmlint: .defs marked executable
I went back to my mingw23-libgcrypt review:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467403
and it looks like you ended up removing the *.def files altogether. That
definitely fixes rpmlint, and I just tried rebuilding gtk-vnc after removing
mingw32-gtk2's *.defs, so MinGW does not need those *.def files, but wouldn't
someone trying to compile against libgcrypt on Windows need them?
What I don't know is whether they absolutely must have +x permissions. I'm
guessing that chmod -x'ing them should be safe, after all, they are just header
files. Should they be readded to libgcrypt?
+ package name
+ spec file name
+ package guideline-compliant
+ license complies with guidelines
+ license field accurate
+ license file not deleted
+ spec in US English
+ spec legible
+ source matches upstream
+ builds under = 1 archs, others excluded
+ build dependencies complete
+ locales handled using %find_lang, no %{_datadir}/locale
N/A library - ldconfig
N/A relocatable: give reason
+ own all directories
+ no dupes in %files
+ permission
+ %clean RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ macros used consistently
+ Package contains code
N/A large docs = -doc
N/A doc not runtime dependent
N/A headers in -devel
N/A static in -static
+ if contains *.pc, req pkgconfig
N/A if libfiles are suffixed, the non-suffixed goes to devel
N/A devel requires versioned base package
N/A desktop file uses desktop-file-install
+ clean buildroot before install
+ filenames UTF-8
SHOULD
- desc and summary contain translations if available
? package build in mock on all architectures
Not tested -- not all dependencies in Fedora yet, thus no Koji
+ package functioned as described
+ scriplets are sane
N/A other subpackages should require versioned base
+ if main pkg is development-wise, pkgconfig can go in main package
+ require package not 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 484360] Review Request: vtg - Vala Toys for gEdit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484360 Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(michel.syl...@gma ||il.com) --- Comment #4 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com 2009-02-09 10:58:13 EDT --- Bizarre: rpm -ql vtg | grep LC_MESSAGES /usr/share/locale/es_AR/LC_MESSAGES/vtg.mo /usr/share/locale/it/LC_MESSAGES/vtg.mo and the intltool dependency (which should pull gettext and gettext-devel; I just dropped the redundant gettext dependency from my .spec) should ensure that these are buildable. Could you check the content of vtg-0.3.2/po and try running 'make' there? We'll find out once GtkSourceCompletion goes in and we can use Koji in any case. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484360] Review Request: vtg - Vala Toys for gEdit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484360 Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(michel.syl...@gma | |il.com) | --- Comment #5 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com 2009-02-09 10:58:24 EDT --- Bizarre: rpm -ql vtg | grep LC_MESSAGES /usr/share/locale/es_AR/LC_MESSAGES/vtg.mo /usr/share/locale/it/LC_MESSAGES/vtg.mo and the intltool dependency (which should pull gettext and gettext-devel; I just dropped the redundant gettext dependency from my .spec) should ensure that these are buildable. Could you check the content of vtg-0.3.2/po and try running 'make' there? We'll find out once GtkSourceCompletion goes in and we can use Koji in any case. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484359] Review Request: gtksourcecompletion - Completion support for GtkSourceView
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484359 --- Comment #6 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com 2009-02-09 11:05:16 EDT --- OK, so once we can resolve the vtg build issue, both reviews should be in good shape. I'm contacting upstream about the licensing text. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467420] Review Request: mingw32-gtk2 - MinGW Windows Gtk2 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=467420 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(rjo...@redhat.com | |) | --- Comment #8 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 11:05:45 EDT --- I don't even know enough to speculate about *.def files, so I raised a question on the mailing list: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/fedora-mingw/2009-February/000437.html Thanks for the review. I will raise a CVS request next. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484360] Review Request: vtg - Vala Toys for gEdit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484360 Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(rjo...@redhat.com ||) --- Comment #6 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com 2009-02-09 11:11:26 EDT --- Just noticed a test for LC_MESSAGES in ./configure that might be relevant: it tried compiling a file that includes locale.h, which is in glibc-headers. This is not listed as something that is explicitly pulled in by Koji in the packaging guidelines, but in my experience it's always installed anyway (it can be uninstalled cleanly if you also remove sectool and sectool-gui). Could you check if glibc-headers is installed? 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 467420] Review Request: mingw32-gtk2 - MinGW Windows Gtk2 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=467420 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 11:07:42 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mingw32-gtk2 Short Description: MinGW Windows Gtk2 library Owners: rjones berrange Branches: EL-5 F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484704] New: Review Request: libapogee - Library for Apogee CCD Cameras
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libapogee - Library for Apogee CCD Cameras https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484704 Summary: Review Request: libapogee - Library for Apogee CCD Cameras Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: sergio.pa...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/libapogee.spec SRPM URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/libapogee-2.2-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Apogee library is used by applications to control Apogee CCDs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484704] Review Request: libapogee - Library for Apogee CCD Cameras
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484704 Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||478539 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484359] Review Request: gtksourcecompletion - Completion support for GtkSourceView
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484359 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 11:24:27 EDT --- Just put that link into the spec file when you check it in. Package is APPROVED by rjones. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484360] Review Request: vtg - Vala Toys for gEdit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484360 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(rjo...@redhat.com | |) | --- Comment #7 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 11:28:14 EDT --- Yes, I've got gettext, gettext-devel and glibc-headers. Running 'make install' explicitly in the po directory does install the correct files. Configure indicates that it has found all the right tools. I will attach the build log anyway in case you can see anything. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484704] Review Request: libapogee - Library for Apogee CCD Cameras
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484704 Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||libapogee -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484360] Review Request: vtg - Vala Toys for gEdit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484360 --- Comment #8 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 11:28:56 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=331329) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=331329) Log file of rpmbuild on Fedora 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 462521] Review Request: simplyhtml - Application and a java component for rich text processing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462521 --- Comment #7 from Mary Ellen Foster mefos...@gmail.com 2009-02-09 11:29:25 EDT --- I asked on fedora-devel-java-list about the com.sun.* classes, and unfortunately, it looks like since the license of these files includes * You acknowledge that this software is not designed, licensed or intended * for use in the design, construction, operation or maintenance of any * nuclear facility. they can't be used in Fedora. Here's the mailing list thread: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-java-list/2009-February/msg8.html For the ExampleFileFilter, it doesn't look like it would be too difficult to patch the code to use the javax.swing.filechooser.FileNameExtensionFilter that was introduced in JDK 1.6 and that provides similar functionality. For the ElementTreePanel, I'm not sure if there's an alternative implementation, but I haven't looked too hard. In the worst case, I guess you could patch out the use of the ElementTreePanel entirely, and then there would be some functionality missing from simplyhtml. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481732] Review Request: stardict-english-czech - czech dictionary for stardict
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481732 --- Comment #11 from Petr Sklenar pskle...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 11:32:26 EDT --- hi, yes I live :) I made changes up your comments, and latest version is here: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/psklenar/stardict-dic-cs_CZ.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/psklenar/stardict-dic-cs_CZ- 20081201-2.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 481732] Review Request: stardict-dic-cs_CZ - czech dictionary for stardict
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481732 Petr Sklenar pskle...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |stardict-english-czech -|stardict-dic-cs_CZ - czech |czech dictionary for|dictionary for stardict |stardict| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #31 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-02-09 11:43:01 EDT --- Reposting the URLS: SPEC: http://jzygmont.fedorapeople.org/dosemu.spec SRPM: http://jzygmont.fedorapeople.org/dosemu-1.4.0-1868svn.src.rpm Jason: Apart from bumping the Release number, it is a good practice to post new URLs each time you change a package, so the reviewer can easily find the latest packages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484704] Review Request: libapogee - Library for Apogee CCD Cameras
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484704 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jrez...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jrez...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 11:53:15 EDT --- rpmlint output: libapogee.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libapogeee.so.2.2 e...@glibc_2.2.5 libapogee.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libapogeeu.so.2.2 e...@glibc_2.2.5 Please report upstream bug as for libindi. I'll continue later, I have to leave now, but from first view it looks OK for me. License typo - it is GPLv2+ not GPL+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476776] Review Request: python-shove - Common object storage frontend.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476776 Luke Macken lmac...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Luke Macken lmac...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 12:09:20 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: python-shove Short Description: Common object storage frontend Owners: lmacken Branches: F-9 F-10 EL-4 EL-5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476789] Review Request: python-repoze-what - Authorization for WSGI applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476789 --- Comment #6 from Luke Macken lmac...@redhat.com 2009-02-09 12:21:24 EDT --- http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-repoze-what-1.0.4-1.fc10.src.rpm http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-repoze-what.spec * Mon Feb 09 2009 Luke Macken lmac...@redhat.com - 1.0.4-1 - Update to 1.0.4 - Fix the URL I had no luck getting the Sphinx documentation to build. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457304] Review Request: gestikk - Mouse gestures for you to easily control your PC
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457304 Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||loganje...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|loganje...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com 2009-02-09 12:20:11 EDT --- I will review this. Stand by for a full 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 483301] Review Request: muse - Midi/Audio Music Sequencer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483301 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||DEFERRED --- Comment #12 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2009-02-09 12:27:40 EDT --- reclosing, rest in peace. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484487] Review Request: perl-Template-Plugin-JavaScript - Encodes text to be safe in JavaScript
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484487 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #4 from Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 2009-02-09 12:28:02 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 484676] Review Request: eclipse-dtp - Eclipse Data Tools Platform
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484676 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 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 484725] New: Review Request: eclipse-moreunit - Assisting in writing more unit tests plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: eclipse-moreunit - Assisting in writing more unit tests plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484725 Summary: Review Request: eclipse-moreunit - Assisting in writing more unit tests plugin Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: akurt...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-moreunit.spec SRPM URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-moreunit-1.2.0-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: MoreUnit is an eclipse plugin that should assist you writing more unit test. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484359] Review Request: gtksourcecompletion - Completion support for GtkSourceView
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484359 Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com 2009-02-09 12:38:22 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: gtksourcecompletion Short Description: Completion support for GtkSourceView Owners: salimma Branches: F-9 F-10 EL-5 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 484726] New: Review Request: impressive - The stylish way of giving presentations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: impressive - The stylish way of giving presentations https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484726 Summary: Review Request: impressive - The stylish way of giving presentations Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: allis...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://allisson.fedorapeople.org/packages/impressive/impressive.spec SRPM URL: http://allisson.fedorapeople.org/packages/impressive/impressive-0.10.2-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Impressive is a program that displays presentation slides. But unlike OpenOffice.org Impress or other similar applications, it does so with style. Smooth alpha-blended slide transitions are provided for the sake of eye candy, but in addition to this, Impressive offers some unique tools that are really useful for presentations. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
