[Bug 473744] Review Request: flint - Fast Library for Number Theory
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473744 --- Comment #6 from Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net 2009-02-19 02:58:13 EDT --- Also, I did test the mpQS binary which seemed to work fine. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473744] Review Request: flint - Fast Library for Number Theory
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473744
Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|al...@users.sourceforge.net
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #5 from Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net 2009-02-19
02:57:12 EDT ---
Looks good so far, however:
1. Upstream has a new version 1.0.21, can you update your spec and SRPM?
2. Does this new release enable shared libraries? as it looks like there is
code in the .spec file and patches that enable this. What are upstream's plans
on this?
In the meantime I did a preliminary review which I will recheck upon upgrading
to the newer upstream.
Did koji scratch build in rawhide:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1138697
+:ok, =:needs attention, -:needs fixing, N/A =: not applicable to this package
MUST Items:
[x] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
rpmlint flint-1.0.18-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
rpmlint flint-devel-1.0.18-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm
flint-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
rpmlint flint-1.0.18-1.fc9.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[x] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
[x] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[x] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[x] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[x] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
(no license file included)
[x] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[x] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[x] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
md5sum flint-1.0.18.tar.gz rpmbuild/SOURCES/flint-1.0.18.tar.gz
a16ce740c16b296a331ee68a94bc0305 flint-1.0.18.tar.gz
a16ce740c16b296a331ee68a94bc0305 rpmbuild/SOURCES/flint-1.0.18.tar.gz
[x] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one supported architecture.
see koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1138697
[x] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[x] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
[N/A] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using
the %find_lang macro.
[N/A] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not
just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig
in %post and %postun.
[N/A] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review
[x] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
[x] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
[x] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
[x] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[x] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. This is
described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines.
[N/A] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a doc subpackage.
[N/A] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[x] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[x] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
-devel subpackage supplies a virtual provides for the static package, this is
OK because -devel only provides static libraries
[x] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
(for directory ownership and usability).
[N/A] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.
[x] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages
[Bug 485607] Review Request: scitools - A Python library for scientific computing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485607 --- Comment #40 from Joseph Smidt josephsm...@gmail.com 2009-02-19 03:15:13 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: scitools Short Description: A Python library for scientific computing Owners: jsmidt Branches: F-9 F-10 EL-4 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 485893] Review Request: perl-NOCpulse-Object - NOCpulse Object abstraction for Perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485893 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 473744] Review Request: flint - Fast Library for Number Theory
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473744 --- Comment #7 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2009-02-19 03:39:17 EDT --- Sure, I'll update to the new version and send an email to upstream about including license texts. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485954] Review Request: Marlin, A Sound Sample Editor for GNOME.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485954 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|josephsm...@gmail.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 485954] Review Request: Marlin, A Sound Sample Editor for GNOME.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485954 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fab...@bernewireless.net --- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-02-19 03:45:30 EDT --- Some other quick comments on your spec file - '--vendor fedora' is obsolete https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Desktop_files - Isn't 'BuildRequires: gettext' (for translation) and 'Requires: hicolor-icon-theme' (for icons) missing? - Unversioned shared libraries should go into a -devel subpackage https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Devel_Packages - Take a look at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#desktop-database about 'Requires(post)/(postun): desktop-file-utils' -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 464931] Review Request: appliance-os recipe for building the appliance operating system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464931 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fab...@bernewireless.net --- Comment #8 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-02-19 03:51:20 EDT --- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=6549 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478674] Review Request: pp3 - Creation of sky charts in Postscript or PDF format
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478674 Marek Mahut mma...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 | Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-02-19 04:01:04 EDT --- Sorry for the delay. I think it is much better now, thanks. Radek already sponsored you, lifting FE_NEEDSPONSOR. 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 455168] Review-Request: mon - General-purpose resource monitoring system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455168 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|RAWHIDE |NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #12 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-02-19 04:10:24 EDT --- Imported and build. Thanks for review 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 455174] Review Request: perl-Mon - Mon Perl module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455174 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|RAWHIDE |NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #6 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-02-19 04:10:21 EDT --- Imported and build. Marcela, please do not close the reviews once they are finished, they are only to be closed once the package successfully builds. And 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 486292] New: Review Request: perl-NOCpulse-CLAC - NOCpulse Command Line Application framework for Perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-NOCpulse-CLAC - NOCpulse Command Line Application framework for Perl Alias: perl-NOCpulse-CLAC https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486292 Summary: Review Request: perl-NOCpulse-CLAC - NOCpulse Command Line Application framework for Perl Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: msu...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Blocks: 452450 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- SPEC: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/perl-NOCpulse-CLAC/perl-NOCpulse-CLAC.spec SRPM: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/perl-NOCpulse-CLAC/perl-NOCpulse-CLAC-1.9.8-1.src.rpm Description: NOCpulse provides application, network, systems and transaction monitoring, coupled with a comprehensive reporting system including availability, historical and trending reports in an easy-to-use browser interface. This packages provides a framework for writing command line oriented applications. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1139001 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475065] Review Request: givaro - C++ library for arithmetic and algebraic computations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475065 Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||al...@users.sourceforge.net AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|al...@users.sourceforge.net --- Comment #4 from Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net 2009-02-19 04:30:08 EDT --- Can you update taking into account comment #3? and I'll review 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 483838] Review Request: vmware-view-open-client - Client for Windows desktops managed by VMware View
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483838
--- Comment #7 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-02-19 04:40:26 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
...
Bad:
- Package should have 'ExclusiveArch: %{ix86}'
Golly! It contains i386 assembly code. Oh, how Enterprisey! :)
I'll fix that, in next spin of the package (probably after I fix the openssl
issue and we agree on the split of documentation)
- Package should use desktop-file-install as described in the
packaging guildlines
- Start of the application caused the following error messages:
SSLLoadSharedLibrary: Failed to load library
libcrypto.so.0.9.8:/usr/lib/libcrypto.so.0.9.8: Kann die Shared-Object-Datei
nicht öffnen: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden
SSLLoadSharedLibrary: Failed to load library
libcrypto.so.0.9.8:/usr/lib/libcrypto.so.0.9.8: Kann die Shared-Object-Datei
nicht öffnen: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden
Hm, hm, hm, for me it worked. Did you build it and run it on different
versions? (e.g. F9 vs. Rawhide?). If not, please tell me which release did you
compile run on and.
It would be awesome if you could tell me which versions of openssl and
openssl-devel did you use, as well as attaching the build log.
- Copyright note in the sources says, that LGPLv2+ is the valid license
specification
for the license tag
* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
* under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License as published
* by the Free Software Foundation version 2.1 and no later version.
This is from brokerDlg.cc. It specifically says no later version.
- %doc stanza is large. So it may be nice, if you can put
View_Client_Admin_Guide.pdf
and View_Client_Help.pdf in a separate subpackage
I would agree, given the package is intended for thin clients, which are
usually space-constrained, but looking at the size of binary itself compared to
the documentation, I'm quite hesitant to split that:
$ du -sh vmware-view doc/*pdf
5.5Mvmware-view
528Kdoc/View_Client_Admin_Guide.pdf
548Kdoc/View_Client_Help.pdf
What do you think? If you still think the split is a good idea, I'll do that.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486229] Review Request: indi-apogee - The INDI driver for Apogee Alta (U E) line of CCDs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486229 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jrez...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475322] Review Request: genus2reduction - Computes Reductions of Genus 2 Proper Smooth Curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475322
Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||al...@users.sourceforge.net
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|al...@users.sourceforge.net
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net 2009-02-19
04:51:48 EDT ---
Here is the review:
If the license is ok with spot, then I can approve this.
+:ok, =:needs attention, -:needs fixing, N/A =: not applicable
MUST Items:
[x] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
# rpmlint genus2reduction-0.3-2.fc11.i586.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
# rpmlint genus2reduction-0.3-2.fc9.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[x] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
[x] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[-] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
The .mbox file has the correspondence with the license, which isn't very
satisfactory. Is it supposed to be GNU GPL v2 +.
Let's see if we can't get a more definitive statement.
[-] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
see above
[N/A] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
[x] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[x] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[x] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
md5sum genus2reduction-0.3.tar.gz
/home/alex/rpmbuild/SOURCES/genus2reduction-0.3.tar.gz
46a5816f6c60edc8b3d047aa24a9f99e genus2reduction-0.3.tar.gz
46a5816f6c60edc8b3d047aa24a9f99e rpmbuild/SOURCES/genus2reduction-0.3.tar.gz
[x] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one supported architecture.
koji build for rawhide:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1139057
[N/A] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[x] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
[N/A] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using
the %find_lang macro.
[x] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in
%post and %postun.
[N/A] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review
[x] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
[x] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
[x] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
[x] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[x] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. This is
described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a doc subpackage.
[x] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[N/A] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[N/A] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[N/A] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
(for directory ownership and usability).
[N/A] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.
[N/A] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
[N/A] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec.
[N/A] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section.
[x] MUST: Packages must not own files or
[Bug 475322] Review Request: genus2reduction - Computes Reductions of Genus 2 Proper Smooth Curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475322 Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486302] New: Review Request: parrot - Parrot is a virtual machine.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: parrot - Parrot is a virtual machine. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486302 Summary: Review Request: parrot - Parrot is a virtual machine. Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: g...@zimt.uni-siegen.de QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/parrot.rpms/fedora/specs/parrot.spec SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/parrot.rpms/fedora/8/SRPMS/parrot-0.9.1-1.fc8.src.rpm Description: Parrot is a virtual machine designed to efficiently compile and execute bytecode for dynamic languages. Parrot is the target for Rakudo Perl 6, as well as variety of other languages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438609] Review Request: elisa-plugins-bad - Bad Plugins for the Elisa Media Center
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438609 --- Comment #15 from Matthias Saou matth...@rpmforge.net 2009-02-19 04:56:43 EDT --- The elisa-base package comes from the main elisa one. You should be able to locally rebuild both elisa and elisa-plugins-good in order for elisa-plugins-bad to rebuild, install and work. I'll make sure right now that both are up to 0.5.28 in devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476398] Review Request: eclib - A Library for Doing Computations on Elliptic Curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476398 Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||al...@users.sourceforge.net AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|al...@users.sourceforge.net 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 476398] Review Request: eclib - A Library for Doing Computations on Elliptic Curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476398
--- Comment #2 from Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net 2009-02-19
05:44:18 EDT ---
Here is the review:
Is there really no base package? Not sure what the best way is to deal with
the lack of soname versions here.
+:ok, =:needs attention, -:needs fixing, N/A =: not applicable
MUST Items:
[-] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
# rpmlint eclib-devel-20080310-1.p7.fc11.i586.rpm
eclib-static-20080310-1.p7.fc11.i586.rpm
/home/alex/RPMS/SRPMS/eclib-20080310-1.p7.fc9.src.rpm
eclib-devel.i586: W: no-dependency-on eclib/eclib-libs/libeclib
eclib-devel.i586: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libjcntl.so
eclib-devel.i586: W: no-soname /usr/lib/librankntl.so
eclib-devel.i586: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/librankntl.so
e...@glibc_2.0
eclib-devel.i586: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libg0nntl.so
eclib-devel.i586: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libcurvesntl.so
eclib-static.i586: W: no-documentation
eclib-static.i586: W: binaryinfo-readelf-failed
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.
Looks like there needs to be some soname patching perhaps. See the Debian
package
[-] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
Version number issues, the patch 7 can cause problems. Let's say you
increase the patch version and reset the release number to one, then you would
have
# rpmdev-vercmp 20080310-2.p7 20080310-1.p8
0:20080310-2.p7 is newer
but you really want -1.p8 to be newer. This is OK if you always increment the
release number as patch version increases.
[x] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
[x] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[x] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[N/A] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
[x] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[x] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[x] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
md5sum eclib-20080310.p7.spkg rpmbuild/SOURCES/eclib-20080310.p7.spkg
bfef44c232be8cfad5e9cb7030dc1c2e eclib-20080310.p7.spkg
bfef44c232be8cfad5e9cb7030dc1c2e rpmbuild/SOURCES/eclib-20080310.p7.spkg
[x] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one supported architecture.
koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1139171
[N/A] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[x] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
[N/A] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using
the %find_lang macro.
[-] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in
%post and %postun.
This is related to the soname issues above.
[N/A] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review
[x] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
[x] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
[x] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
[x] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[x] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. This is
described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines.
[N/A] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a doc subpackage.
[N/A] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[x] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[x] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[N/A] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
(for directory ownership and usability).
[x] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.
[x] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
[x] MUST: Packages must NOT contain
[Bug 464931] Review Request: appliance-os recipe for building the appliance operating system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464931 --- Comment #9 from Alan Pevec ape...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 05:47:41 EDT --- spin-kickstarts is missing reusable kickstart includes: /usr/share/appliance-os/includes/base-pkgs.ks /usr/share/appliance-os/includes/base-post.ks /usr/share/appliance-os/includes/repo-rhel5.ks /usr/share/appliance-os/includes/rhel5-pkgs.ks David, could you propose a patch to spin-kickstarts to include those? 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 486249] Review Request: perl-Tie-RefHash-Weak - Tie::RefHash subclass with weakened references in the keys
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486249 manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 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 481731] Review Request: resource-agents - Open Source HA Resource Agents for Red Hat Cluster
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481731 Jim Meyering meyer...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||meyer...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486292] Review Request: perl-NOCpulse-CLAC - NOCpulse Command Line Application framework for Perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486292 manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 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 225683] Merge Review: dev86
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225683 --- Comment #5 from Jindrich Novy jn...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 06:46:09 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) Notes: * BuildRequires: gawk is redundant (gawk is in Exceptions list https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2 ). Not an issue, though. Removed. * Looks like this package disallows parallel builds. You should add note about it. Yup, commented. * It's a good idea to add notes about patch status - upstreamed (with bz# or with maillist's link), specific for fedora and therefore shouldn't be upstreamed, etc Upstream is dead for couple of years AFAIK. * What the purpose of expression at line 16? /usr/bin/strip tries to strip binaries generated by dev86. This is bad as strip doesn't know their format and fails so it is needed to be removed from __os_install_post. Other things (except this sorrow situation with RPM_OPT_FLAGS, described above) Fixed. Shipped binaries should now be compiled with RPM_OPT_FLAGS. - File, containing the text of the license(s), MUST be included in %doc. Added both GPL and LGPL. +/- Header files must be in a -devel package, but I'm in doubts whether this rule can or cannot be applied in this case. And the next one. +/- Static libraries must be in a -static package. See note above. Better not trying to fix this. This package is in many cases special and doesn't match the ordinary -devel and -static like packaging scheme. -- 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 486229] Review Request: indi-apogee - The INDI driver for Apogee Alta (U E) line of CCDs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486229
Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 06:45:11
EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: f11 / i586, x86_64, ppc, ppc64
[x] Rpmlint output clean
[-] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are
listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in koji.
- koji dist-f11
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[?] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
=== SUMMARY ===
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 483853] Review Request: tcl-trf - Tcl extension providing transformer commands
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483853 --- Comment #1 from Vinagre vina...@gmail.com 2009-02-19 06:49:02 EDT --- Thanks, Hope this will be added soon, I need this library. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483434] Review Request: argtable2 - A library for parsing GNU style command line arguments
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483434 --- Comment #2 from Jess Portnoy kerne...@gmail.com 2009-02-19 06:59:29 EDT --- Thank you for your review, Christian. New src.rpm is available from: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/argtable/argtable2-10-2.src.rpm Spec file URL is still: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/argtable/argtable2.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 225683] Merge Review: dev86
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225683 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-02-19 07:18:16 EDT --- OK, this package is APPROVED. What should I do next? I guess, that I should simply close this ticket, since the package already in Fedora. -- 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 486302] Review Request: parrot - Parrot is a virtual machine.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486302 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lemen...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-02-19 07:22:30 EDT --- There was initial attempt to package this title (see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=246348 ), so, please, contact Steven Pritchard in order to better coordinate your efforts. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481731] Review Request: resource-agents - Open Source HA Resource Agents for Red Hat Cluster
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481731 Jim Meyering meyer...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Jim Meyering meyer...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 08:41:33 EDT --- looks fine (though the scripts need separate review). There was one should I pointed out (add LICENSE), and Fabio said he'd address 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 486229] Review Request: indi-apogee - The INDI driver for Apogee Alta (U E) line of CCDs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486229 Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com 2009-02-19 08:51:47 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: indi-apogee Short Description: indi-apogee Owners: sergiopr Branches: F-10 F-9 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481731] Review Request: resource-agents - Open Source HA Resource Agents for Red Hat Cluster
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481731 Fabio Massimo Di Nitto fdini...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review+ |fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Fabio Massimo Di Nitto fdini...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 08:53:35 EDT --- In order to address the LICENSE file missing, I'll have to release a new upstream tarball. It will happen this week so i don't think is a big blocker. Jim, thanks a lot 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 464781] Review Request: flexdock - Java docking UI element. First package.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464781
--- Comment #31 from D Haley my...@yahoo.com 2009-02-19 08:52:29 EDT ---
Apologies for delay in the response, haven't had a chance to look at this in
the past few days.
SPEC URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/flexdock-10.spec
SRPM URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/flexdock-0.5.1-10.fc10.src.rpm
Scratch:
F9:http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1139730
F10:http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1139731
$ rpmlint ../SRPMS/flexdock-0.5.1-10.fc10.src.rpm flexdock.spec
../RPMS/i386/flexdock-0.5.1-10.fc10.i386.rpm
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
#Licence is MIT on their website, Apache in their LICENSE.txt
License: MIT and ASL 2.0
Wrong. LICENSE.txt is actually word-for-word MIT:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/MIT#Modern_Style_with_sublicense
Fixed.
Doesn't build on F-9/x86_64 and F-9/i386 (java bug?).
Between changes from my earlier f-9 srpms to now, a new buildrequires was
needed. Added:
BuildRequires: ant-apache-regexp
Hence the build for F9 is now fixed.
That '/' at the end is not necessary. Also the patch file name has a redundant
'patch' in it, same for others.
I don't see the problem with having such things there, but to aid review
process I have removed these.
Why is the above necessary instead of:
echo sdk.home=%{_jvmdir}/java-1.6.0 workingcopy.properties
Changed. This was based upon a jpackage script.
BuildRequires: jpackage-utils
is listed twice.
Also see the attached patch for more cosmetic fixes.
Applied, with thanks.
Is java-1.6 (not older and not newer) strictly required?
No, this was part of the hack. Changed to java-devel, java and %{_jvmdir}/java
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486229] Review Request: indi-apogee - The INDI driver for Apogee Alta (U E) line of CCDs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486229 --- Comment #6 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com 2009-02-19 09:06:26 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: indi-apogee Short Description: The INDI (Instrument Neutral Distributed Interface) driver for Apogee Alta (U E) line of CCDs. Owners: sergiopr Branches: F-10 F-9 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481751] Review Request: fence-agentes - Fence Agents for Red Hat Cluster
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481751 Jim Meyering meyer...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||meyer...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 470066] Review Request: R-qtl - Quantitative trait loci (qtl) functionality for R
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470066 Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pin...@pingoured.fr --- Comment #6 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr 2009-02-19 09:10:17 EDT --- You could also try to ask upstream to clarify the situation regarding the license of this package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 470066] Review Request: R-qtl - Quantitative trait loci (qtl) functionality for R
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470066 --- Comment #7 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr 2009-02-19 09:19:35 EDT --- BTW the url tag is incorrect: http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/qtl/index.html This page shows again a GPLv2+ license, I think you should ask upstream :) And there is also a new release of R/qtl -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480887] Review Request: kguitar - Guitar Tabulature Music Editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480887 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #14 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-02-19 10:10:38 EDT --- Now closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485954] Review Request: Marlin, A Sound Sample Editor for GNOME.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485954 --- Comment #5 from Dodji Seketeli do...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 10:13:40 EDT --- I have updated the spec/srpm following your comments, at: http://people.redhat.com/dseketel/rpms/marlin/marlin-3.spec http://people.redhat.com/dseketel/rpms/marlin/marlin-0.13-3.fc10.src.rpm The build results for F-10 and F-11 are at: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1139769 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1139841 --- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-02-19 03:45:30 EDT --- [...] - '--vendor fedora' is obsolete Right. Removed. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Desktop_files - Isn't 'BuildRequires: gettext' (for translation) I believe this is in the Requires of intltool that is BuildRequire'ed by Marlin already. and 'Requires: hicolor-icon-theme' (for icons) missing? I believe this is in the Requires of gtk2 that is BuildRequired'd by Marlin already. - Unversioned shared libraries should go into a -devel subpackage Ah, in theory yes. But I did talk with upstream about this and he doesn't want to have a devel package yet, even though the architecture of marlin is done so that external apps can benefit from it's internal libraries. The reason is that the internal libraries are still a moving target so he can't guarantee any API/ABI compatibility yet. When he can do that, we can start shipping a -devel package I think. Does this make any sense ? - Take a look at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#desktop-database about 'Requires(post)/(postun): desktop-file-utils' Okay. Thanks. I removed the 'Requires(post)/(postun): desktop-file-utils'. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 --- Comment #9 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-02-19 10:48:46 EDT --- Ian: I see you've attempted the builds, but still haven't clarified the situation with the License. Your build failed on ppc, please don't trigger any more builds until the problem with license is resolved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486390] New: Review Request: simspark - Spark physical simulation system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: simspark - Spark physical simulation system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486390 Summary: Review Request: simspark - Spark physical simulation system Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: heda...@grad.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://hedayat.fedorapeople.org/simspark_review/0.1-1/simspark.spec SRPM URL: http://hedayat.fedorapeople.org/simspark_review/0.1-1/simspark-0.1-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Spark is a physical simulation system. The primary purpose of this system is to provide a *generic* simulator for different kinds of simulations. In these simulations, agents can participate as external processes. Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1139976 Rpmlint output: Doesn't report any errors for src.rpm and spec files. But for rpm packages: simspark.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/simspark/fonts/VeraMono.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansMono.ttf simspark.x86_64: W: symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/simspark/fonts/VeraMono.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansMono.ttf simspark-devel.x86_64: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib Due to the new font packaging guidelines, this package doesn't contain any font files and it points to a font from dejavu-fonts-sans-mono package instead. And this package requires dejavu-fonts-sans-mono because of this. Extra comments: In the latest version of rcssserver3d package (rcssserver3d-0.6 package is already in Fedora), this package is split into some sub-packages by upstream. Two main sub-packages are simspark and rcssserver3d. simspark package provides core libraries which were previously part of rcssserver3d package. But since simspark is a generic simulation framework and not soccer specific, it is provided as a separate package now. So, the next version of rcssserver3d package (version 0.6.1 and later versions) will depend on this package. A question: Because of this separation, this package have a few files in /usr/bin which conflicts with rcssserver3d-0.6. (But rcssserver3d-0.6.1 won't have any conflicting files with simspark package). Therefore, users which simply update rcssserver3d will not face any problems, but if someone which has rcssserver3d-0.6 decides to install simspark, he can't do that since these packages have some conflicting files. Should I add a Conflicts: section to simspark spec file?! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483620] Review Request: libbind - ISC's standard resolver 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=483620 --- Comment #2 from Adam Tkac at...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 11:01:28 EDT --- Updated files: http://atkac.fedorapeople.org/libbind.spec http://atkac.fedorapeople.org/libbind-6.0-0.2.b1.fc11.src.rpm libbind.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided bind-libs Well, I don't think it is wise to put Provides: bind-libs to spec. Old bind-libs contained both bind-libs and libbind files. Some libraries have been splitted to libbind but some libraries are still in bind-libs. Due this reason I think we should not provide bind-libs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473205] Review Request: gPlanarity - puzzle game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473205 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG Flag|needinfo?(a...@antistof.dk) | --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-02-19 10:57:34 EDT --- Now closing. If someone wants to import this package, please file a new review request and mark this bug as a duplicate of the new one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485954] Review Request: Marlin, A Sound Sample Editor for GNOME.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485954 --- Comment #6 from Joseph Smidt josephsm...@gmail.com 2009-02-19 11:21:13 EDT --- Fabian, correct me if I'm wrong, but gtk2 being a BuildRequires won't actually pull hicolor-icon-theme into Requires. If the end user doesn't build the package himself/herself they will never receive hicolor-icon-theme. So I believe you still need that for Requires. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226601] Merge Review: xorg-x11-drv-jamstudio
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226601 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG Flag|fedora-review?, | |needinfo?(k...@redhat.com) | --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-02-19 12:09:05 EDT --- Closing as this package is being dropped from the distro. -- 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 226589] Merge Review: xorg-x11-drv-dynapro
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226589 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG --- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-02-19 12:14:28 EDT --- This is being dropped from the distro. -- 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 226584] Merge Review: xorg-x11-drv-citron
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226584 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG --- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-02-19 12:14:54 EDT --- This is being dropped from the distro. -- 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 226587] Merge Review: xorg-x11-drv-dmc
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226587 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG --- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-02-19 12:14:42 EDT --- This is being dropped from the distro. -- 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 476315] Review Request: evolution-mapi - Exchange 2007 support for Evolution
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476315 --- Comment #10 from Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 12:29:06 EDT --- Update adds some missing BuildRequires. http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/mapi/SPECS/evolution-mapi.spec http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/mapi/SRPMS/evolution-mapi-0.25.91-2.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 453395] Review Request: OpenChange - Microsoft Exchange access with native protocols
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453395 Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: libmapi - |Review Request: OpenChange |OpenChange: Microsoft |- Microsoft Exchange access |Exchange access with native |with native protocols |protocols | --- Comment #18 from Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 12:29:02 EDT --- Update adds some missing BuildRequires. http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/mapi/SPECS/openchange.spec http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/mapi/SRPMS/openchange-0.8-2.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485636] Review Request: cutecom - A GUI application for serial port communications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485636 Jose Luis joseluisblan...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|joseluisblan...@gmail.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 485607] Review Request: scitools - A Python library for scientific computing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485607 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #41 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-19 12:47:07 EDT --- Thanks! cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485636] Review Request: cutecom - A GUI application for serial port communications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485636 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|joseluisblan...@gmail.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-02-19 12:47:09 EDT --- Ah... you can't assign what you submitted to yourself. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485954] Review Request: Marlin, A Sound Sample Editor for GNOME.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485954 --- Comment #7 from Dodji Seketeli do...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 13:01:25 EDT --- --- Comment #6 from Joseph Smidt josephsm...@gmail.com 2009-02-19 11:21:13 EDT --- Fabian, correct me if I'm wrong, but gtk2 being a BuildRequires won't actually pull hicolor-icon-theme into Requires. Right, sorry. I miss-read what Fabian said. I thought he was saying hicolor-icon-theme was missing in Requires. My bad. I will update the package then. Were my other comments correct ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480857] Review Request: pdumpfs - Daily backup system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480857 Henrique LonelySpooky Junior henrique...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485636] Review Request: cutecom - A GUI application for serial port communications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485636
Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #4 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-02-19
13:10:35 EDT ---
Assigning to myself.
Some notes.
* SourceURL
- I recomment to use %{version} tag in Source because with
this you probably won't have to modify SourceURL when
the version is upgraded, ref:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Using_.25.7Bversion.7D
* Description
---
It is free software and distributed under
the GNU General Public License Version 2, which can find in the file COPYING.
---
- is not needed because we can check this by License tag in
the rebuilt rpm.
- I also think that
---
It is written using the Qt library by Trolltech.
---
is not needed.
* Desktop file issue
- From build.log
---
+ desktop-file-install --dir
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/cutecom-0.20.0-2.fc11.i386/usr/share/applications/
/builddir/build/BUILD/cutecom-0.20.0/cutecom.desktop
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/cutecom-0.20.0-2.fc11.i386/usr/share/applications/cutecom.desktop:
warning: value for key Path in group Desktop Entry does not look like an
absolute path
---
I guess Path= item in cutecom.desktop is not needed.
- By the way, cutecom.desktop does not have any Categories.
Please add the proper one.
? cutecom.desktop specifies openterm as Icon, however
gnome-icon-theme 2.25.91 does not have openterm.{png,svg} (2.24.x
had this icon).
Maybe with formal 2.26 gnome-icon-theme release
openterm.{png,svg} will reintroduced again, however
it may be better that you change Icon item to utilities-terminal
(actually in gnome-icon-theme 2.24.x, openterm.{png,svg} was
symlinks to utilities-terminal.{png,svg}.
? Also please check is the empty line MimeType= in
cutecom.desktop is needed. If this MimeType= line can be
removed, then calling update-desktop-database on scriptlets
is no longer needed, ref:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#desktop-database
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225659] Merge Review: cracklib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225659 --- Comment #6 from Nalin Dahyabhai na...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 13:42:34 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) cracklib-dicts.x86_64: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib This is true, but I don't really see a problem in what you're doing. Does anything absolutely require those symlinks to be there? If it didn't, you could conceivably make this subpackage noarch (once the buildsys support for that is finished). The FascistCheck() function in the library takes an absolute path to the dictionaries to check, so there's an unknown number of packages out there that hard-code locations under /usr/lib /usr/lib64 (though, come to think of it, there could be some mistakenly referencing /usr/lib on 64-bit systems... ugh). It also complains about a couple of things which could do with fixing: cracklib-dicts.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot The standard CrackLib dictionaries. Terribly minor, but perhaps worth fixing if you're in the spec. Agreed, fixed. cracklib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/sbin/cracklib-unpacker ['/usr/lib64'] cracklib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/sbin/cracklib-packer ['/usr/lib64'] cracklib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/sbin/cracklib-check ['/usr/lib64'] cracklib-python.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/_cracklibmodule.so ['/usr/lib64'] I don't know why these didn't turn up earlier. Maybe libtool2 actually makes things worse? In any case, the recommended hack of tweaking libtool didn't help, so I guess a call to chrpath is needed. Weird indeed. A local rebuild seems to keep cracklib-packer from being afflicted again, so I'm going to check in the summary change and throw it at the build system. ... Hmm, looks good from here. -- 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 478470] Review Request: mrpt - The Mobile Robot Programming Toolkit (MRPT)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478470 Jose Luis joseluisblan...@gmail.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 458359] Review Request: gpscorrelate - A GPS photo correlation / geotagging 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=458359 --- Comment #11 from Till Maas opensou...@till.name 2009-02-19 13:59:49 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) Is there a reason why RELEASES and README are not included in %doc? Beside the %doc stuff I see no further blocker, package APPROVED. I agree that the file RELEASES should be included, but the file README only includes installation information, that do not help Fedora users. The usage of 'redhat-starthere' is a bit problematic but I guess that if the icon is missing there is no icon showing up in menu. Let's wait for the icon from the ArtTeam. So should I just use the redhat-starthere icon in the .desktop but not add a dependency to fedora-icon-theme? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478470] Review Request: mrpt - The Mobile Robot Programming Toolkit (MRPT)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478470 --- Comment #31 from Jose Luis joseluisblan...@gmail.com 2009-02-19 13:58:11 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mrpt Short Description: Libraries and programs for mobile robot SLAM and navigation Owners: joseluisblancoc Branches: F-9 F-10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426387] Merge reviews to be completed for F9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426387 Bug 426387 depends on bug 225659, which changed state. Bug 225659 Summary: Merge Review: cracklib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225659 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225659] Merge Review: cracklib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225659 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE AssignedTo|na...@redhat.com|ti...@math.uh.edu Flag|fedora-review- |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-02-19 14:04:32 EDT --- I know there was a problem with libtool and rpath which has been fixed very recently (in 2.2.6-10) and indeed when I build this package now the rpath issue is gone. So I'd say that everything looks good to me, and I'll twiddle the flags and close this out. -- 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 485641] Review Request: pdftk - The PDF Toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485641 --- Comment #4 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-02-19 14:12:30 EDT --- New Release: Spec URL: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/pdftk/pdftk.spec SRPM URL: http://www.herr-schmitt.de/pub/pdftk/pdftk-1.41-7.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483838] Review Request: vmware-view-open-client - Client for Windows desktops managed by VMware View
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483838 --- Comment #9 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-02-19 14:20:31 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=332614) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=332614) Buildl log from fedora-10-i386 mock -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483838] Review Request: vmware-view-open-client - Client for Windows desktops managed by VMware View
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483838 --- Comment #8 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-02-19 14:18:26 EDT --- I have make a mock build for F-10 and install the i386 package on a x86_64 system. openssl-devel-0.9.8g-12.fc10.i386 on mock and of the system on which I have installed 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 221717] Review Request: agg - C++ rendering framework, move from core to shared
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=221717 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #36 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-02-19 14:26:42 EDT --- I went and whined in that bug and it seems to have been fixed. I'm not sure why someone who understood the problem didn't do that, but in any case the rpath problems are gone from this package after a rebuild (which will happen automatically next week anyway). So, APPROVED. I'll close this out. -- 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 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 --- Comment #9 from Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fab...@gmail.com 2009-02-19 14:43:50 EDT --- As koji seems not closing this bug, I do it manualy. (gestikk is now in stable repository). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fab...@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 481064] Review Request: squeak-image - the standard image file for the Squeak VM
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481064 Gavin Romig-Koch ga...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Gavin Romig-Koch ga...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 14:46:14 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: squeak-image Short Description: Standard Squeak image as distributed by squeak.org. Owners: gavin Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: gavin -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468465] Review Request: posterazor - Make your own poster
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468465 Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fab...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #8 from Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fab...@gmail.com 2009-02-19 14:43:05 EDT --- As koji seems not closing this bug, I do it manualy. (posterazor is now in stable repository). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481066] Review Request: etoys - the Etoys image for the Squeak VM
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481066 Gavin Romig-Koch ga...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Gavin Romig-Koch ga...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 14:44:03 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: etoys Short Description: It is a media-rich authoring environment built on Squeak Owners: gavin Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: gavin -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481056] Review Request: squeak-vm - a Smalltalk interpreter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481056 Gavin Romig-Koch ga...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Gavin Romig-Koch ga...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 14:52:38 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: squeak-vm Short Description: Squeak is an implementation of the Smalltalk Owners: gavin Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: gavin -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483434] Review Request: argtable2 - A library for parsing GNU style command line arguments
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483434
--- Comment #3 from Christian Krause c...@plauener.de 2009-02-19 14:59:03
EDT ---
Thanks for the new packages. Here is a more detailed review:
Most issues are resolved besides some minor documentation issue and the static
library.
GOOD:
* Rpmlint
rpmlint SRPMS/argtable2-10-2.fc10.src.rpm
RPMS/i386/argtable2-10-2.fc10.i386.rpm
RPMS/i386/argtable2-debuginfo-10-2.fc10.i386.rpm
RPMS/i386/argtable2-devel-10-2.fc10.i386.rpm SPECS/argtable2.spec
4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
* Package name, spec file name and upstream package name match
* Download via spectool -r works
* Packaged tarball matches upstream (md5sum: 2ea4cd1b55ee250baa37a42b255ae426)
* License tag GPLv2+ matches the source (Although I've checked only a couple of
files)
* License GPLv2+ is acceptable for Fedora
* License file packaged in %doc
* Mock build successfully (F10)
* Koji scratch build successful for all archs on F10 and F11:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1140640
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1140678
* No build dependencies besides base system
* No locales included, so no locale handling needed
* Package contains libraries, ldconfig is called in %post and %postun
* %defattr used for all packages
* %clean section exists
* *.la files deleted
* Macros correctly used
* Header in -devel package
* *.so link in -devel package
* -devel package requires fully versioned base package
* rm -rf %{buildroot} in %install and %clean
NEED WORK:
* examples are included in both base and -devel package
* other files /usr/share/doc/argtable2 should be better packaged in
%doc of the devel package
* static libraries are shipped in devel package: please have a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#StaticLibraries
and either put the static library in a -static package or remove 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 483615] Review Request: CodeAnalyst - Performance Analysis Suite for AMD-based System (based on Oprofile)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483615 --- Comment #9 from Suravee Suthikulpanit suravee.suthikulpa...@amd.com 2009-02-19 15:07:25 EDT --- I have posted the new SRPM and spec files here: Spec URL: http://ftp-developer.amd.com/user/ssuthiku/CodeAnalyst-gui-2.8.38-2.fc11/CodeAnalyst-gui.spec SRPM URL: http://ftp-developer.amd.com/user/ssuthiku/CodeAnalyst-gui-2.8.38-2.fc11/CodeAnalyst-gui-2.8.38-2.fc11.src.rpm (From a scratch build against fc11 on Koji http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1140372) rpmlint output: # rpmlint CodeAnalyst-gui-2.8.38-2.fc11.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. # rpmlint CodeAnalyst-gui-2.8.38-2.fc11.x86_64.rpm CodeAnalyst-gui.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/codeanalyst CodeAnalyst-gui.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/codeanalyst CodeAnalyst-gui.x86_64: W: incoherent-init-script-name codeanalyst 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. - The first two warnings is explained in comment #5 above. - The third warning complains about the naming of /etc/rc.d/init.d/codeanalyst script, and suggesting that it should be changed to codeanalyst-gui to match the package name. However, I would like to keep this name as it does not make sense to name the script codeanalyst-gui to match the package name. This script is also used in the upstream CodeAnalyst distribution. The reason I name the package CodeAnalyst-gui is to differentiate the normal CodeAnalyst distribution which contains other components such as a modified version of Oprofile and the kernel modules. - The upstream tarball is now available at (http://developer.amd.com/media/CALinuxSnapshot/CodeAnalyst-gui-2.8.38.tar.gz) Thank you, Suravee -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459444] Review Request: ctdb - Clustered TDB
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459444 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #27 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-19 15:21:00 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485973] Review Request: maxr - A classic turn-based strategy game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485973 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #5 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-19 15:21:47 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 466147] Review Request:fedora-ksplice - Script Collection for Using KSplice on Fedora Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466147 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|cheekybo...@foresightlinux. ||org Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #10 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-19 15:17:47 EDT --- The upstream README says GPLv3 or later... shouldn't the tag in the spec be 'GPLv3+'? cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225847] Merge Review: gnupg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225847
Nalin Dahyabhai na...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|needinfo?(na...@redhat.com) |
--- Comment #3 from Nalin Dahyabhai na...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 15:32:26 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #1)
Hi Nalin. Here's a review for gnupg.
Thanks for that, sorry for the delay.
NEEDSWORK items
* rpmlint produces several warnings and errors on the srpm
Fixed up at various times by various people... looks pretty clean now.
The binary rpm produces one warning:
$ rpmlint gnupg-1.4.6-4.fc6-results/gnupg-1.4.6-4.fc6.i386.rpm
W: gnupg file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/man1/gpg.ru.1.gz
I don't know Russian so I couldn't verify if iconv would properly converted
the
man page so I left it alone.
rpmlint says this needs to be UTF-8, but it's evidently KOI8-RU. Converting.
* Scriplets are sane
The scriptlets to install info pages could be simplified somewhat and made
more
consistent with the examples in Packaging/ScriptletSnippets
The additional checks fix #91641 (error when installed with --excludedocs).
I'd rather just leave it as-is and not have to worry about that.
Comments/Questions/Notes
There are a number of unneeded configure flags to enable zlib, bzip, readline,
and curl. These are all enabled by default in the current gnupg so they can
be
removed.
Dropped explicit requests for bzip, readline, and curl, but leaving the one for
zlib in so that configure won't fall back to the internal copy if something
looks off about the system one.
Why is %{_libdir} used for %{_libexecdir}? Packaging/Guidelines allow the use
of this dir and it is what upstream does by default. %{_libdir}/gnupg is used
for extensions, though none are currently shipped with this package (or by any
others in Fedora AFAIK).
We used to not allow %{_libexecdir}. Reverted.
Another very a minor point, the preferred value for the BuildRoot tag is
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
This is not a blocker.
Changed to match at some point. I think it looks pretty good now.
--
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 485941] Review Request: eclipse-valgrind - Eclipse Valgrind Integration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485941 Elliott Baron eba...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Elliott Baron eba...@redhat.com 2009-02-19 16:09:21 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: eclipse-valgrind Short Description: Eclipse plugins to integrate the Valgrind tool suite into the workbench. Owners: ebaron Branches: F-10 InitialCC: overholt -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485641] Review Request: pdftk - The PDF Toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485641
--- Comment #5 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-02-19
16:09:49 EDT ---
Finally, we can review this package :)
Here are my notes:
* rpmlint says
pdftk.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 30, tab: line 1)
pdftk.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch0: pdftk-1.41-rpmopt.patch
pdftk.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch1: pdftk-1.41-system-libgcj.patch
pdftk.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch2: pdftk-1.41-gcjh.patch
- We can get rid of those patches that are commented out. We will not need
them anymore.
- The mixed spaces/tabs is easy to fix.
* The package needs
BuildRequires: java-devel = 1:1.6.0
otherwise, it will not build with mock.
* rm -rf java_libs/gnu_local java_libs/java_local java_libs/gnu
can be replaced with just
rm -rf java_libs
* The guidelines say: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of
the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
So I think, we should remove Source1.
* %defattr(-,root,root,-) is preferred.
* There is a convenient %{_javadir} macro. You can replace the instances of
/usr/share/java
%{_datadir}/java
with
%{_javadir}
Sorry, this one is my bad. I should have told you this properly before.
* Parallel make must be supported whenever possible. If it is not supported,
this should be noted in the SPEC file as a comment.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481676] blender-wrapper doesn't tweak the user script directory as appropriate.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481676 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) kwiz...@gmail.com 2009-02-19 16:38:02 EDT --- I saw you've tweaked the blender-wrapper script on devel, I will test again soon. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481676] blender-wrapper doesn't tweak the user script directory as appropriate.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481676 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added CC|fedora-package-rev...@redha | |t.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 486475] New: Review Request: ps3-utils - Utilities for Sony PlayStation 3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: ps3-utils - Utilities for Sony PlayStation 3 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486475 Summary: Review Request: ps3-utils - Utilities for Sony PlayStation 3 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: geoffrey.lev...@am.sony.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://cell.gotdns.org/pub/ps3-utils-rpm/ps3-utils.spec SRPM URL: http://cell.gotdns.org/pub/ps3-utils-rpm/ps3-utils-2.3-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: An updated version of the ps3pf-utils package. The current ps3pf-utils is very old, and some options are no longer compatible with the newer ps3-utils. Updates ps3pf-utils-2.1 to ps3-utils-2.3. This is my first package, and I am seeking a sponsor. David Woodhouse was maintaining ps3pf-utils, but he is no longer doing that. I will take over. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486476] New: Review Request: xfce4-power-manager - Power management for the Xfce desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: xfce4-power-manager - Power management for the Xfce desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486476 Summary: Review Request: xfce4-power-manager - Power management for the Xfce desktop environment Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fed...@christoph-wickert.de QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/xfce4-power-manager.spec SRPM URL: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/xfce4-power-manager-0.6.2-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Xfce Power Manager uses the information and facilities provided by HAL to display icons and handle user callbacks in an interactive Xfce session. Xfce Power Preferences allows authorised users to set policy and change preferences. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477750] Review Request: Ogmtools - Tools for Ogg media streams
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477750 --- Comment #5 from Gianluca Sforna gia...@gmail.com 2009-02-19 17:36:23 EDT --- ping... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485636] Review Request: cutecom - A GUI application for serial port communications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485636
--- Comment #5 from Jose Luis joseluisblan...@gmail.com 2009-02-19 17:59:04
EDT ---
Thanks Mamoru!
Ah... you can't assign what you submitted to yourself.
Okay... wasn't sure about that!
SourceURL
Changes to %{name}-%{version}
Description
Shortened.
Desktop file.
This file has many issues... I've finally left it as:
desktop-file-install --remove-key=Path --remove-key=Encoding
--remove-key=BinaryPattern --remove-key=TerminalOptions --add-category=System
--dir ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_datadir}/applications/ $(pwd)/cutecom.desktop
which fixes almost everything. The only remaining detail is the icon, but I'm
not sure on whether it can be changed via desktop-file-install, or I should
modify it manually (via 'sed', etc...) from the script.
The new revision is here:
SPEC: http://babel.isa.uma.es/mrpt/src-repo/rpm/cutecom.spec
SRPM: http://babel.isa.uma.es/mrpt/src-repo/rpm/cutecom-0.20.0-3.fc10.src.rpm
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486482] New: Review Request: perl-Gnome2 - Perl interface to the 2.x series of the GNOME libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-Gnome2 - Perl interface to the 2.x series of the GNOME libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486482 Summary: Review Request: perl-Gnome2 - Perl interface to the 2.x series of the GNOME libraries 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/perl-Gnome2/perl-Gnome2.spec SRPM URL: http://allisson.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-Gnome2/perl-Gnome2-1.042-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: The Gnome2 module allows a perl developer to use the Gnome libraries. Find out more about Gnome+ at http://www.gnome.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 486489] New: Review Request: perl-Object-Event - Class that provides an event callback interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-Object-Event - Class that provides an event callback interface https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486489 Summary: Review Request: perl-Object-Event - Class that provides an event callback interface 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/perl-Object-Event/perl-Object-Event.spec SRPM URL: http://allisson.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-Object-Event/perl-Object-Event-0.7-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: This module was mainly written for Net::XMPP2, Net::IRC3, AnyEvent::HTTPD and BS to provide a consistent API for registering and emitting events. Even though I originally wrote it for those modules I released it separately in case anyone may find this module useful. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486493] New: Review Request: perl-Net-DBus-GLib - Perl extension for the DBus GLib bindings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-Net-DBus-GLib - Perl extension for the DBus GLib bindings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486493 Summary: Review Request: perl-Net-DBus-GLib - Perl extension for the DBus GLib bindings 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/perl-Net-DBus-GLib/perl-Net-DBus-GLib.spec SRPM URL: http://allisson.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-Net-DBus-GLib/perl-Net-DBus-GLib-0.33.0-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Net::DBus::GLib provides an extension to the Net::DBus module allowing integration with the GLib mainloop. To integrate with the main loop, simply get a connection to the bus via the methods in Net::DBus::GLib rather than the usual Net::DBus module. That's it - every other API remains the same. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 245342] Review Request: perl-Gnome2 - Perl interface to the 2.x series of the GNOME libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=245342 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|NOTABUG |DUPLICATE --- Comment #13 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-02-19 19:19:35 EDT --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 486482 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486482] Review Request: perl-Gnome2 - Perl interface to the 2.x series of the GNOME libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486482 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dcantr...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2009-02-19 19:19:35 EDT --- *** Bug 245342 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486476] Review Request: xfce4-power-manager - Power management for the Xfce desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486476 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ke...@tummy.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-19 19:34:15 EDT --- I'll review this. Look for a review later tonight or tomorrow... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485604] Review Request: gigolo - GIO/GVFS management application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485604 Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@christoph-wickert.de Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475144] Review Request: metalink - CLI Metalink generation 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=475144 Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fed...@christoph-wickert.de --- Comment #14 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de 2009-02-19 20:18:25 EDT --- Removing the blocker on bug # 177841 because I'm going to sponsor Ant. Mamoru, can you approve the package then? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478504] Review Request: gget - Download Manager for the GNOME desktop.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478504
--- Comment #29 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de
2009-02-19 20:46:25 EDT ---
The package doesn't build in Rawhide:
Processing files: gget-epiphany-extension-0.0.4-7.fc11
error:
File not found by glob:
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/gget-0.0.4-7.fc11.i386/usr/lib/epiphany/*/extensions/gget*
The epiphany extension does not get build because configure only checks for
epiphany = 2.24, but rawhide already has 2.25. So you need to patch
configure/configure.ac, I will attach a patch.
Issues that needed to be fixed according to comment # 23:
OK - MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual
license.
OK - MUST: The license file from the source package is included in %doc.
OK - MUST: The package contains a GUI application and includes a
%{name}.desktop file, and that file is properly installed with
desktop-file-install in the %install section.
OK - MUST: The packages do not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
OK - %changelog is complete now
OK - ChangeLog from source is included in %doc
OK - The desktop file contains a mimetype and update-mime-database is run
properly.
OK - Includes Requires: dbus now.
OK - Timestamp of Source0 is matching.
$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/gget-*
gget.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/gconf/schemas/gget.schemas
gget.i386: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/gget/metalink.py 0644
gget.i386: E: no-binary
gget.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 68, tab: line 6)
gget-epiphany-extension.i386: W: no-documentation
gget-epiphany-extension.i386: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/epiphany/2.25/extensions/gget-epiphany.py 0644
gget-epiphany-extension.i386: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 3 warnings.
Two of these need fixing:
The non-executable-script error was my fault, please enable the chmod again.
The mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs warning is only cosmetic, but I suggest you
ether use spaces or tabs. Personally I prefer spaces, because tabs sometimes
look weird in (cvs) diffs.
Final Notes:
The BR could be reworked to be more precise and more legible:
BuildRequires: pygtk2-devel = 2.10.0
BuildRequires: pygobject2-devel = 2.12.0
BuildRequires: gnome-python2-devel = 2.16.0
BuildRequires: gnome-python2-extras = 2.14.2
BuildRequires: dbus-python-devel = 0.82
BuildRequires: notify-python = 0.1.1
BuildRequires: intltool
This is what configure really checks for. The versions are not really needed
for Fedora because all supported releases are up to date, but they might be
helpful for people who want to rebuild the package for EPEL or other older
releases.
Please add --add-category=FileTransfer to desktop-file-install to allow
nested menus (we are working on a set of submenu-packages for user who have a
lot of stuff installed)
The outstanding issues are only minor. Please do one more build to fix them and
to apply the patch and I will approve 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 478504] Review Request: gget - Download Manager for the GNOME desktop.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478504 --- Comment #30 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de 2009-02-19 20:48:14 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=332659) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=332659) Patch to support epiphany up to 2.26 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486493] Review Request: perl-Net-DBus-GLib - Perl extension for the DBus GLib bindings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486493 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
