[Bug 462297] Review Request: perl-o2sms - A perl module to send SMS messages using .ie websites
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462297 --- Comment #3 from Miroslav Suchy msu...@redhat.com 2009-02-23 04:08:30 EDT --- Mea culpa. I recently have similar issue in different packages and I find that you *should* own the directories: /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/WWW /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/WWW/SMS /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/WWW/SMS/IE Which you already own. So you had it correctly. Sorry for confusion. So please just upload new version with updated Source0 and that will be all. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479803] Review Request: cabal2spec - generates spec files for Haskell packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479803 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #13 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 04:11:34 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i386). koji Build = http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1145408 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url d2586c3c99e2ae06c8721409cf440343 cabal2spec-0.7.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Not a GUI App. 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 486698] Review Request: fedora-setup-keyboard - Hal keyboard layout callout
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486698 Rudolf Kastl che...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||che...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Rudolf Kastl che...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 04:18:35 EDT --- why doesent it obsolete the package if it is going to replace 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 486865] Review Request: arptools - Collection of libnet and libpcap based ARP utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486865
manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|wo...@nobugconsulting.ro
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-02-23
04:19:11 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: devel/x86_64
[x] Rpmlint output:
source RPM: empty
binary RPM:empty
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPLv2+
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
SHA1SUM of package: 92f93fb928f9294f3e48897ee6d5c12b186913d9
arptools-1.0.2.tar.gz
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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 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.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Final provides and requires are sane.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[ ] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: devel/x86_64
[?] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on:
[x] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
[x] %check is present and the test passes.
*** 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 484591] Review Request: muse - Midi/Audio Music Sequencer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484591 Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|hdego...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com 2009-02-23 04:24:12 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) I decided to finish the package. SPEC: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/muse.spec SRPM: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/muse-1.0-0.3.rc1.fc10.src.rpm Changelog: 1:1.0-0.3.rc1 - Handle the Provides list within the SPEC file - Add gcc-4.4 patch - Fix size_t warnings - Explain the various licenses I did not get the DocBook issue in the rawhide build. Maybe it is fixed(?) It seems so. I did a full review and it looks very good now! Approved :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457160] Review Request: Zorba - General purpose XQuery processor implemented in C++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457160 --- Comment #17 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-02-23 04:24:54 EDT --- The LaTeX/TeX/dvips BuildRequires in comment 13 are because of this build failure in koji: -- latex command LATEX_COMPILER not found but usually required. You will probably get warnings and user inetraction on doxy run. -- makeindex command MAKEINDEX_COMPILER not found but usually required. -- dvips command DVIPS_CONVERTER not found but usually required. [...] -- Configuring incomplete, errors occurred! /usr/bin/makeindex is provided by package texlive, so if LaTeX is truely optional, you would need the tex(tex) BuildRequires I marked redundant. [...] * src.rpm size has increased by factor 3. The spec %changelog doesn't mention that you've replaced the source tarball with one that differs from the previous package by a 25M diff. In case it is a snapshot retrieved from a SCM system, you need to follow: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Using_Revision_Control https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#SnapshotPackages * rpmdev-diff also reveals an added space character in the %cmake invocation that is not commented on. Two of the three -D options now put a space between -D and the variable name. No reason to believe it doesn't work, it's just strange. With other commands, silently added whitespace may lead to problems. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Dodji Seketeli do...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from Dodji Seketeli do...@redhat.com 2009-02-23 04:26:21 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: marlin Short Description: A Sound Sample Editor for GNOME Owners: dodji Branches: F-10 InitialCC: dodji -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 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 476404] Review Request: bullet - 3D Collision Detection and Rigid Body Dynamics Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476404 --- Comment #25 from Bruno Mahe br...@gnoll.org 2009-02-23 04:53:29 EDT --- I have fixed most of the issues. About the directory ownership issue note in comment #24, I have been quite verbose to avoid unnecessary and unrelated directory inclusion. Otherwise I would end up with empty directories named CMakeFiles or ibmsdk. Or should I explicitly delete them ? Here is the updated SPEC file: http://www.gnoll.org/download/bullet.spec Here is the updated SRPM : http://www.gnoll.org/download/bullet-2.73-5.fc10.src.rpm Thank you very much for your patience! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486865] Review Request: arptools - Collection of libnet and libpcap based ARP utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486865 Jakub Hrozek jhro...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486865] Review Request: arptools - Collection of libnet and libpcap based ARP utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486865 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Hrozek jhro...@redhat.com 2009-02-23 05:04:36 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: arptools Short Description: Collection of libnet and libpcap based ARP utilities Owners: jhrozek Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: none -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||182235 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 --- Comment #4 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2009-02-23 05:14:22 EDT --- Looks like the only concern is making sure legal is ok with the license. Is that right, Alex? I've already talked to upstream (sort of; Sage upstream anyways) about the license quite a bit but they don't choose to ship a license I believe. (After all, it is a very small 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 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 --- Comment #5 from Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net 2009-02-23 05:24:18 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) Looks like the only concern is making sure legal is ok with the license. Is that right, Alex? I've already talked to upstream (sort of; Sage upstream anyways) about the license quite a bit but they don't choose to ship a license I believe. (After all, it is a very small library.) Yep, that's the only (minor) issue. Somebody posted a link to more recent e-mail correspondence on #fedora-devel: http://lists.pardus.org.tr/paketler-commits/2008-January/042349.html that seemed to indicate GPLv2 (no +). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480538] Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480538 --- Comment #27 from Liang Suilong liangsuil...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 05:28:58 EDT --- Mamoru Tasaka， I have uploaded a new package for iptux. The latest version is 0.45-rc3. Here is url: http://liangsuilong.fedorapeople.org/iptux/iptux-0.4.5-0.1.rc3.fc10.src.rpm Because of too many bugs, I dropped this version. I think it is not important. The author said that he also was not satisfied with iptux-0.4.5-rc2. In the meanwhile I think Fedora need a stable software, not one full of bugs. In iptux-0.4.5-rc3, the author add quite many functions. For example warning sounds. Maybe we should add gstreamer and gstreamer-devel into BuildRequires. But I am not sure, I do not do it. I try to use mock to test. But my mock is too slow when it is running yum. Maybe my bandwidth speed is too low. Another question, is it really dbus-devel? I try many times. I do not think it need dbus-devel. Maybe I need to test more times. Regards, Liang -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list 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 #11 from Oded Arbel o...@geek.co.il 2009-02-23 05:45:07 EDT --- Matthew - where can I report problems with the evolution-mapi implementation (not 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 486680] Review Request: chisholm-banana-peels-fonts - A Decorative Serif Font
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486680
Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||needinfo?(josephsm...@gmail
||.com)
--- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-02-23
05:49:21 EDT ---
1. The official template evolved a little lately, please use
/etc/rpmdevtools/spectemplate-fonts-simple.spec
from fontpackages-devel ≥ 1.20 as target. Tools like meld can help you see the
differences
(you can find latest fotpackages here if it has not hit a mirror next you yet
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=7288 )
1.a replace your %define with %global
1.b. Drop this
# Do not trust font metadata versionning unless you've checked upstream does
# update versions on file changes. When in doubt use the timestamp of the most
# recent file as version.
1.c and drop this
%dir %{_fontdir}
2. The timestamp of the font file inside the zip you use as source is 20090125,
please use it as version. What matters is when upstream created a file, not
when you packaged it
3. The font name declared by the TTF is Banana, that's what you need to use
in your fontconfig file (OTOH a font named Banana with a Peels face/style
is going to drive apps crazy, please ask upstream to rename the font to Banana
Peels with a standard book, regular or maybe bold face/style)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486687] Review Request: chisholm-rubbing-fonts - Decorative Sans Serif Font
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486687 --- Comment #7 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-02-23 05:54:51 EDT --- Just a nitpicking The font declares itself as Rubbing Font. That's what fontconfig and apps will see, so that's also what you need to use in your fontconfig rules (I agree the Font bit is quite silly and upstream would be well advised to drop it) BTW, there are a few minor template changes in fontpackages-devel 1.20, but nothing dangerous and your current spec will also 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 486937] New: Review Request: rhnlib - Python libraries for the RHN project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rhnlib - Python libraries for the RHN project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486937 Summary: Review Request: rhnlib - Python libraries for the RHN project 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/rhnlib/rhnlib.spec SRPM: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/rhnlib/rhnlib-2.5.10-1.src.rpm Description: rhnlib is a collection of python modules used by the Red Hat Network (http://rhn.redhat.com) software. Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1145761 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461484] Review Request: twin - Textmode window environment for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461484 --- Comment #14 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-02-23 06:35:33 EDT --- I've tried to use the package (both with and without the libXpm-devel BR) in a F-10 guest and results were... strange: - if run from a GUI (direct access from the VM GUI), I can see the message press PAUSE or mouse right button for menu on the topmost line of the screen. The rest of the screen is filled with an ugly backgroun, vaguely similar to a text screen (the aspect from the turbo vision GUI from the '90s ) full of stars (one star per cell). The only way to interact is to press the right button of the mouse, keep it pressed while moving over the desired menu entry and release the button only after the mouse is over the desired entry. Not the most intuitive interface... I've never seen that before on any system that I've worked with, since the era of SFDX - if run from a text console (ssh from the host text console), the mouse is not detected at all (I am offered the choice RETURN to start the app without mouse support or CTRL-C to kill it). After starting without mouse support, I failed to identify the right keyboard combination to trigger any menu action. The screen is once again filled with some blue-ish sort of background -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 224245] Merge Review: squirrelmail
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=224245 --- Comment #22 from Michal Hlavinka mhlav...@redhat.com 2009-02-23 07:01:38 EDT --- new package: squirrelmail-1.4.17-2.fc11 changes: * plugins/demo moved to /usr/share/doc/squirrelmail * bugzila numbers for patches * new patch for big UIDs and 32b systems - with upstream bugzilla link I'm sorry for my slow response, but I have a lot of work now and I prefer to fix not working things first. Anyway, thanks for doing this review. Michal -- 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 458643] Review Request: dansguardian - Content filtering web proxy
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458643 --- Comment #18 from Pavel Lisý pavel.l...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 07:18:51 EDT --- Do you think about making default firewall configuration? Similar settings are made in Ubuntu CE but through firehol package. This is what I use for my children's computers in combination with tinyproxy (running under nobody user on 3128 port): cp -a /etc/sysconfig/iptables /etc/sysconfig/iptables-dansguardian-backup sed \ -e '/-A INPUT -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited/a\ \ # dansguargian settings\ # --- begin\ -A OUTPUT -d 127.0.0.1 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 3128 -m owner ! --uid-owner nobody -j DROP\ # --- end\ ' \ -e '/^\*filter/i\ \ # tinyproxy settings\ # --- begin\ *nat\ :PREROUTING ACCEPT [0:0]\ :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [0:0]\ :OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0]\ :in_trproxy.1 - [0:0]\ :out_trproxy.1 - [0:0]\ -A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --sport 1000:65535 --dport 80 -j in_trproxy.1\ -A in_trproxy.1 -p tcp -j REDIRECT --to-ports 8080\ -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --sport 32768:61000 --dport 80 -j out_trproxy.1\ -A out_trproxy.1 -m owner --uid-owner nobody -j RETURN\ -A out_trproxy.1 -m owner --uid-owner root -j RETURN\ -A out_trproxy.1 -d 127.0.0.1 -j RETURN\ -A out_trproxy.1 -p tcp -j REDIRECT --to-ports 8080\ -A OUTPUT -j ACCEPT\ COMMIT\ # --- end\ ' /etc/sysconfig/iptables-dansguardian-backup /etc/sysconfig/iptables This is useful when you want deny all http traffic outside except defined users (nobody = tinyproxy user, root = yum update, ...) You don't need make proxy setting in browser too. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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-agents - 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 --- Comment #7 from Fabio Massimo Di Nitto fdini...@redhat.com 2009-02-23 07:21:23 EDT --- Hi Jim, Spec URL: http://fabbione.fedorapeople.org/fas/03/fence-agents.spec SRPM URL: http://fabbione.fedorapeople.org/fas/02/fence-agents-3.0.0-3.alpha5.fc11.src.rpm Updated everything with new upstream tarball and incorporated the changes from upstream and packaging that you asked during the review. Fabio -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486937] Review Request: rhnlib - Python libraries for the RHN project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486937 Miroslav Suchy msu...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||rhnlib -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481668] Review Request: spacewalk-koan: provides integration between spacewalk and koan.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481668 Miroslav Suchy msu...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msu...@redhat.com Alias||spacewalk-koan -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486657] Review Request: blahtexml - Converts TeX equations to MathML
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486657 Jeroen van Meeuwen kana...@kanarip.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kana...@kanarip.com --- Comment #1 from Jeroen van Meeuwen kana...@kanarip.com 2009-02-23 07:27:28 EDT --- First stab at this package: 1) On BuildRequires: You only need to require xerces-c-devel (this package requires the non-devel main package as per the guidelines for -devel sub-packages). Minor issue, no showstopper. 2) rpmlint: $ rpmlint /home/jmeeuwen/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/blahtexml-0.6-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm blahtexml.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long Blahtex is a program written in C++, which converts an equation given in a syntax close to TeX into MathML. It is designed by David Harvey and is aimed at supporting equations in MediaWiki. blahtexml.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long Blahtexml is a simple extension of blahtex. In addition to the functionality of blahtex, blahtexml has XML processing in mind and is able to process a whole XML document into another XML document. Instead of converting only one formula at a time, blahtexml can convert all the formulas of the given XML file into MathML. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings. Easily fixed, of course ;-) 3) Source0: Source0 should be the URL to the upstream tarball. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486657] Review Request: blahtexml - Converts TeX equations to MathML
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486657 --- Comment #2 from Jasper Capel ca...@stone-it.com 2009-02-23 08:02:54 EDT --- Thanks. I have modified the files. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486698] Review Request: fedora-setup-keyboard - Hal keyboard layout callout
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486698 --- Comment #2 from Adel Gadllah adel.gadl...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 08:14:09 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) why doesent it obsolete the package if it is going to replace it? Because it doesn't. It does replace FILES shipped in the xserver 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 486657] Review Request: blahtexml - Converts TeX equations to MathML
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486657 --- Comment #3 from Jeroen van Meeuwen kana...@kanarip.com 2009-02-23 08:35:45 EDT --- Whenever you do, please; - bump the release number in the .spec (and add/modify changelog entry/entries) - rebuild the source rpm with the new spec - upload - link the new spec file - link the new srpm 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 453847] Review Request: grid-packaging-tools - The Grid Packaging Tools (GPT)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453847 Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|hdego...@redhat.com --- Comment #20 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com 2009-02-23 08:34:16 EDT --- (In reply to comment #19) (In reply to comment #18) snip * These 2 rpmlint messages: grid-packaging-tools.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/globus/aclocal/bootstrap.frg 0644 grid-packaging-tools.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 115, tab: line 1) The /usr/share/globus/aclocal/bootstrap.frg file is a script fragment - it is not intended to be executable standalone. It does have a shebang so that when put together with other pieces to create a complete script that script will be executable. Making the fragment executable would silence rpmlint, but it would contradict the intended usage of the file. Ok, I'm fine with ignoring the rpmlint output then The specfile uses tabs everywhere for indentation. However it is not possible to enter 1.375 tabs. For this you have do 1 tab + 3 spaces. Line 115 (now 120) starts with a tab, so I don't see why rpmlint complains about it using spaces for indentation. If there at some place in the file was a tab immediately following a space, or a set of 2 or more consecutive spaces crossing or ending at an even 8 column boundary then the warning would make sense. This is not the case. I consider this warning a false positive - at least for my understanding of what mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs means. I agree, one could even call it a bug, so ignore this one too. New version available here: http://www.grid.tsl.uu.se/repos/globus/info/grid-packaging-tools.spec http://www.grid.tsl.uu.se/repos/globus/fedora/10/src/SRPMS/grid-packaging-tools-3.2-14.fc10.src.rpm Looks good! Once 2 more packages are in good shape I'll sponsor you and approve all 3. I'm not doing the approving right now, as some people run scripts in the flags that sets, checking all approved packages have been imported in to CVS, etc. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453848] Review Request: globus-core - Globus Toolkit - Globus Core
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453848 Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|hdego...@redhat.com --- Comment #8 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com 2009-02-23 08:38:56 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) (In reply to comment #6) snip SHOULD FIX: --- * rpmlint warning: globus-core.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 116, tab: line 1) This is the same thing as in the grid-packaging-tools package - I still think this is a false positive. And I still agree :) * How did you come to the devel / non-devel split. Atleast the aclocal and doxygen files look like devel files to me. Only files which are needed to *run* globus tk using applications should be in the main package, the rest should all be in the devel package The globus-core package is very different from the rest of the globus packages. All of globus-core is devel, none of it is needed at runtime. I did the split so that architecture independent files are in the main package and the architecture dependent files are in the devel-package. For a i386 on x86_64 installation you could then install main + devel from x86_64 and devel from i386. I found that to be the most natural split if a split should be done. Thinking about it, it might make more sense to just put all the files in main and not split it into subpackages. You could then still install both i386 and x86_64 together since the common files would be exactly the same. Is more sensible? Yes please do it that way, but keep the -devel subpackage and put all the files in the %files of the devel subpackage. If you then also remove the %files line itself for the main package, only the subpackage will be build. This way we have a srpm and specfile name matching upstream, and still have a -devel extension to make clear this is a devel package * Given the short list of files in the package I see no need for all the magic to generate filelists. Why not just add everything manually (with wildcards) to %files, that way it is much clearer what is going on There is no magic here. The split between packages is automatically defined by gpt. What is done is simply a format conversion form the gpt filelist format to the rpm filelist format. I agree that in the case of globus-core, which is not split in so many sub packages you don't gain a lot. The gain is much more noticeable in packages that generate four or five sub packages. From a package maintainability point of view it is however much easier to use the same packaging instructions for all globus packages, though it is a slight overkill for globus-core. Ok. * Why do you filter out the requires on the gpt modules, the -devel package requiring gpt is fine, and if the main package gets auto requires for gpt that feels like a hint that the package is not split properly. As I said, all of globus-core is really devel. No non-devel package requires globus-core. However all globus-*-devel packages require globus-core and If you install a globus-*-devel package for anything else than building other globus packages you don't need gpt. I really don't like having gpt being dragged in by anything. I consider this a major feature of the packaging. Ok. I didn't prepare a new package yet, since you indicated that you might have additional comments already. Let me know if you want me to create a new package version at this stage. Please do a new version without the package split, then I'll do a full review of that 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 486961] New: Review Request: libservicelog - Servicelog Database and Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libservicelog - Servicelog Database and Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486961 Summary: Review Request: libservicelog - Servicelog Database and Library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: rra...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: https://fedoraproject.org/w/uploads/a/ac/Libservicelog.spec SRPM URL: https://fedoraproject.org/w/uploads/0/03/Libservicelog-1.0.1-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: The libservicelgo package contains a library to create and maintain a database for storing events related to system service. This database allows for the logging of serviceable and informational events, and for the logging of service procedures that have been performed upon the system. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486657] Review Request: blahtexml - Converts TeX equations to MathML
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486657 --- Comment #4 from Jasper Capel ca...@stone-it.com 2009-02-23 08:49:51 EDT --- As you wish :-) specfile: http://bender.newnewyork.nl/review/blahtexml.spec source-rpm: http://bender.newnewyork.nl/review/blahtexml-0.6-2.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486961] Review Request: libservicelog - Servicelog Database and 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=486961 Ondrej Vasik ova...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||ova...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ova...@redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484798] Review Request: xiphos - Bible study and research 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=484798 Nils Philippsen nphil...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||nphil...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|nphil...@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 486977] New: Review Request: gnu-free-fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: gnu-free-fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486977 Summary: Review Request: gnu-free-fonts Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: l...@jcomserv.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Blocks: 477336 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Rename review, as well as work for font guidelines for bug 477336. SPEC: http://zanoni.jcomserv.net/fedora/gnu-free-fonts/gnu-free-fonts.spec SRPM: http://zanoni.jcomserv.net/fedora/gnu-free-fonts/gnu-free-fonts-20090104-3.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 480538] Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480538 --- Comment #28 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-02-23 10:36:10 EDT --- (In reply to comment #27) Mamoru Tasaka， I have uploaded a new package for iptux. The latest version is 0.45-rc3. Here is url: http://liangsuilong.fedorapeople.org/iptux/iptux-0.4.5-0.1.rc3.fc10.src.rpm - Unfortunately this does not build completely. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1146112 - By the way don't downgrade EVR (Epoch-Version-Release) during review request. 0.4.5-0.1.rc3 0.4.5-0.2.rc1 Another question, is it really dbus-devel? I try many times. I do not think it need dbus-devel. Maybe I need to test more times. - See bug 485667 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478743] Review Request: saga - SAGA is a free, hybrid, cross-platform GIS software
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478743 --- Comment #4 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 10:44:23 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 472791] Review Request: fontbox - A Java library for parsing font files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472791 --- Comment #4 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 10:42:54 EDT --- It's been over 2 months. Are you planning to work on this package any more? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483360] Review Request: pdfshuffler - PDF file merging, rearranging, and spliting
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483360 --- Comment #7 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-02-23 10:53:48 EDT --- https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F9/FEDORA-2009-1756 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2009-1746 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472337] Review Request: fabric - A simple pythonic remote deployment 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=472337 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 Summary|Review Request: Marlin, A |Review Request: Marlin - A |Sound Sample Editor for |Sound Sample Editor for |GNOME. |GNOME -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486561] Review Request: monsoon - Monsoon is a Bittorrent client written in Mono and GTK#
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486561 Bug 486561 depends on bug 486558, which changed state. Bug 486558 Summary: Review Request: mono-nat - .NET library for automatic port forwarding https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486558 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486558] Review Request: mono-nat - .NET library for automatic port forwarding
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486558 David Nielsen gnomeu...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||mono-nat-1.0-1.fc11 Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE --- Comment #10 from David Nielsen gnomeu...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 11:22:44 EDT --- Closing, Mono.Nat will be in Rawhide as of next update and F9+10 will follow shortly -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486009] Review Request: php-pear-Crypt-Blowfish - Quick two-way blowfish encryption
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486009
--- Comment #5 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com 2009-02-23 11:29:32
EDT ---
You should remove (probably a paste error, already defined above)
BuildRequires: php-pear(PEAR)
Requires: php-pear(PEAR)
Requires(post): %{__pear}
Requires(postun): %{__pear}
Provides: php-pear(foo) = %{version}
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486904] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Plugin-I18N - I18N for Catalyst
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486904 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 11:33:40 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Catalyst-Plugin-I18N Short Description: I18N for Catalyst Owners: iarnell Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486905] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Session-State-URI - Saves session IDs by rewriting URIs delivered to the client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486905 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 11:35:13 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Session-State-URI Short Description: Saves session IDs by rewriting URIs delivered to the client Owners: iarnell Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476404] Review Request: bullet - 3D Collision Detection and Rigid Body Dynamics Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476404 --- Comment #26 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-02-23 11:39:46 EDT --- Okay, now as this package itself is good: - NOTE: Before being sponsored: This package will be accepted with another few work. But before I accept this package, someone (I am a candidate) must sponsor you. Once you are sponsored, you have the right to review other submitters' review requests and approve the packages formally. For this reason, the person who want to be sponsored (like you) are required to show that you have an understanding of the process and of the packaging guidelines as is described on : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored Usually there are two ways to show this. A. submit other review requests with enough quality. B. Do a pre-review of other person's review request (at the time you are not sponsored, you cannot do a formal review) When you have submitted a new review request or have pre-reviewed other person's review request, please write the bug number on this bug report so that I can check your comments or review request. Fedora package collection review requests which are waiting for someone to review can be checked on my wiki page: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mtasaka#B._Review_request_tickets (Check No one is reviewing) Review guidelines are described mainly on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486009] Review Request: php-pear-Crypt-Blowfish - Quick two-way blowfish encryption
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486009 --- Comment #6 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com 2009-02-23 11:54:21 EDT --- REVIEW: + rpmlint is ok php-pear-Crypt-Blowfish.src: I: checking php-pear-Crypt-Blowfish.noarch: I: checking php-pear-Crypt-Blowfish.noarch: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. + package name + spec file name + package meet the PHP Guidelines + License ok : BSD + License is upstream + spec in english and legible + no license file in sources + sources match the upstream sources 09f0e38a4d524ba4102db5d11b07ffe9 Crypt_Blowfish-1.1.0RC2.tgz + Source URL ok + build / run on F10.x86_64 + BuildRequires (php-pear = 1:1.4.9-1.2) ok + no locale + no .so + own all directories that it creates + no duplicate file + %defattr ok + %clean section + use macros consistently + contain code + no documentation + no devel + no pkgconfig + no sub-package + no GUI + don't own files or directories already owned by other packages + %install start with rm -rf + valid UTF-8 + build in mock (fedora-rawhide-x86_64) + test suite ok (2 PASSED TESTS) + scriptlets ok - Final Requires ok, but see previous comments - Final Provides ko, see previous comments php-pear(foo) = 1.1.0 Just fix the previous comment and I will approve 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 462521] Review Request: simplyhtml - Application and a java component for rich text processing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462521 --- Comment #12 from Mary Ellen Foster mefos...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 11:54:47 EDT --- Sorry, $DAYJOB exploded on me for a couple of weeks there. :) It's more elegant to BuildRequire the demo package and move the file where you need it (+ change package, whatever), but I don't think it would be wrong to just include the file itself as a separate Source: file in the SRPM. Whichever you prefer, I'd say. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484591] Review Request: muse - Midi/Audio Music Sequencer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484591 --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-02-23 11:55:34 EDT --- One comment: - Please update icon cache script when importing to Fedora CVS. ref: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-February/msg01604.html https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Icon_Cache -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487007] New: Review Request: python-stomp - A python client implementation of the STOMP protocol
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: python-stomp - A python client implementation of the STOMP protocol https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487007 Summary: Review Request: python-stomp - A python client implementation of the STOMP protocol Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: si...@sewell.ch QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://silassewell.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/projects/packages/rpms/python-stomp/python-stomp.spec SRPM URL: http://silassewell.googlecode.com/files/python-stomp-0.2.2-2.src.rpm Description: This is a python client implementation of the STOMP protocol. The client is attempting to be transport layer neutral. This module provides functions to create and parse STOMP messages in a programatic fashion. I'll need a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487007] Review Request: python-stomp - A python client implementation of the STOMP protocol
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487007 Silas Sewell si...@sewell.ch changed: What|Removed |Added CC||si...@sewell.ch Blocks||177841 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484591] Review Request: muse - Midi/Audio Music Sequencer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484591 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||na...@ccrma.stanford.edu Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 12:25:07 EDT --- Thanks everyone, Hans, for the review Mamoru and Ralf, for their comments Kevin, for the provides script Fernando, for the initial SPEC file Mamoru, I'll update the script. Thanks again. I'm adding Fernando to the owners. Please let me know if there's anyone else who wants to maintain or audit this package New Package CVS Request === Package Name: muse Short Description: Midi/Audio Music Sequencer Owners: oget nando Branches: F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457160] Review Request: Zorba - General purpose XQuery processor implemented in C++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457160 --- Comment #18 from Paul F. Kunz paulfk...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 12:33:49 EDT --- (In reply to comment #17) The LaTeX/TeX/dvips BuildRequires in comment 13 are because of this build failure in koji: -- latex command LATEX_COMPILER not found but usually required. You will probably get warnings and user inetraction on doxy run. -- makeindex command MAKEINDEX_COMPILER not found but usually required. -- dvips command DVIPS_CONVERTER not found but usually required. [...] -- Configuring incomplete, errors occurred! /usr/bin/makeindex is provided by package texlive, so if LaTeX is truely optional, you would need the tex(tex) BuildRequires I marked redundant. Ok, I put that in. [...] * src.rpm size has increased by factor 3. The spec %changelog doesn't mention that you've replaced the source tarball with one that differs from the previous package by a 25M diff. I realized in the middle of the night that I packaged the wrong version of the sources. The large size difference is due to additional files releated to the testsuite used by the upstream developers. This is fixed now. Sorry about the error. * rpmdev-diff also reveals an added space character in the %cmake invocation that is not commented on. Two of the three -D options now put a space between -D and the variable name. No reason to believe it doesn't work, it's just strange. With other commands, silently added whitespace may lead to problems. I've made the white space consistent. New upload SRPM: ftp://zorba-xquery.com/zorba-0.9.5-4.fc10.src.rpm SPEC: ftp://zorba-xquery.com/zorba.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 484509] Review Request: php-ezc-Base - eZ Components Base
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484509 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com 2009-02-23 12:42:32 EDT --- REVIEW: + rpmlint is ok php-ezc-Base.src: I: checking php-ezc-Base.noarch: I: checking 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. + package name + spec file name + package meet the PHP Guidelines (new update) + License ok : BSD + License is upstream + spec in english and legible + license file in sources is provided + sources match the upstream sources 27d5d39a21668eb3fbae60cc4aa8f0c2 Base-1.6.1.tgz + Source URL ok + build on F10.x86_64 + BuildRequires (php-pear = 1:1.4.9-1.2) ok + no locale + no .so + own all directories that it creates + no duplicate file + %defattr ok + %clean section + use macros consistently + contain code + no documentation + no devel + no pkgconfig + no sub-package + no GUI + don't own files or directories already owned by other packages + %install start with rm -rf + valid UTF-8 + build in mock (fedora-rawhide-x86_64) + no test suite + scriptlets ok + Final Requires ok php-channel(components.ez.no) php-common = 5.2.1 php-pear(PEAR) + Final Provides ok php-pear(components.ez.no/Base) = 1.6.1 php-ezc-Base = 1.6.1-2.fc8 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 472639] Review Request: Scilab - Numerical Analysis toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472639 --- Comment #19 from D Haley my...@yahoo.com 2009-02-23 12:43:17 EDT --- Updating SRPM/SPEC to latest. SPEC URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/scilab-5.1-1.spec SRPM URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/scilab-5.1-1.fc10.src.rpm Koji: No, due to missing deps Rpmlint: $ rpmlint ../RPMS/i386/scilab-5.1-1.fc10.i386.rpm | grep -v lang 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 441 warnings. These are due to the file extension. These are not translation files. $ rpmlint scilab.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint ../SRPMS/scilab-5.1-1.fc10.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Known issues: Currently scilab is affected by a bug which causes a startup crash [1]. This SRPM will, against current F10, exhibit this crash. However this should not be related to the SPEC/SRPM, and as the depends of this bug are not done, I don't see this as a huge problem [1] http://bugzilla.scilab.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4052 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486475 Geoff Levand geoffrey.lev...@am.sony.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484563] Review Request: php-ezc-ConsoleTools - eZ Components ConsoleTools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484563
Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@famillecollet.com
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com 2009-02-23 12:58:39
EDT ---
REVIEW:
+ rpmlint is ok
php-ezc-ConsoleTools.src: I: checking
php-ezc-ConsoleTools.noarch: I: checking
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
+ package name ok
+ spec file name ok
+ package meet the PHP Guidelines (new update)
+ License ok : BSD
+ License is upstream
+ spec in english and legible
+ license file in sources is provided
+ sources match the upstream sources
b680b22c79f7e665e604354f6bdb3383 ConsoleTools-1.5.tgz
+ Source URL ok
+ build on F10.x86_64
+ BuildRequires (php-pear = 1:1.4.9-1.2) ok
+ no locale
+ no .so
+ own all directories that it creates
+ no duplicate file
+ %defattr ok
+ %clean section
+ use macros consistently
+ contain code
+ no documentation
+ no devel
+ no pkgconfig
+ no sub-package
+ no GUI
+ don't own files or directories already owned by other packages
+ %install start with rm -rf
+ valid UTF-8
- not tested with mock
+ no test suite
+ scriptlets ok
- Final Requires KO
- Final Provides KO
MUST fixe (ezc = components.ez.no) :
Requires: php-pear(%{channel}/Base) = 1.6
Provides: php-pear(%{channel}/%{pear_name}) = %{version}
To be removed (already required by Base)
Requires: php-pear(PEAR)
Requires: php-channel(%{channel})
Requires php-common = 5.2.1 could be kept as it could be different (between
packages) in the future.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484509] Review Request: php-ezc-Base - eZ Components Base
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484509 Guillaume Kulakowski llaum...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Guillaume Kulakowski llaum...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 13:19:00 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: php-ezc-Base Short Description: Provides the basic infrastructure that all packages rely on Owners: llaumgui Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486686] Review Request: tkgate - Digital Circuit Simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486686 --- Comment #1 from Chitlesh GOORAH cgoo...@yahoo.com.au 2009-02-23 13:41:57 EDT --- chitlesh(~)[0]$tkgate I could not locate the tkgate home directory. I tried looking in: /home/chitlesh (current directory) /usr/share/tkgate (primary location) /home/chitlesh/rpmbuild/BUILD/tkgate-2.0-b6 (secondary location) Try setting the environment variable TKGATE_HOME. --- Can you fix this please before I start 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 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 Ant Bryan anthonybr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #16 from Ant Bryan anthonybr...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 13:50:51 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: metalink Short Description: A command line Metalink Generator. Owners: ant Branches: F-9 F-10 F-11 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 Ant Bryan anthonybr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #35 from Ant Bryan anthonybr...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 13:47:42 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: gget Short Description: Download Manager for the GNOME desktop Owners: ant Branches: F-9 F-10 F-11 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 462297] Review Request: perl-o2sms - A perl module to send SMS messages using .ie websites
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462297 --- Comment #4 from Niall Sheridan nsheri...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 14:11:17 EDT --- Thanks for clearing that up. I've updated the package to the latest version, tested on i386 and x86_64 and fixed Source0. Version 3.32 is at: http://www.evil.ie/fedora/rpms/o2sms/perl-o2sms.spec http://www.evil.ie/fedora/rpms/o2sms/perl-o2sms-3.32-1.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484485] Review Request: perl-Fedora-App-ReviewTool - Application classes for reviewtool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484485 --- Comment #7 from Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 2009-02-23 14:26:38 EDT --- Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-Fedora-App-ReviewTool.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-Fedora-App-ReviewTool-0.04-3.fc10.src.rpm Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1147253 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486009] Review Request: php-pear-Crypt-Blowfish - Quick two-way blowfish encryption
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486009 --- Comment #7 from Xavier Bachelot xav...@bachelot.org 2009-02-23 14:27:32 EDT --- Thanks for the review, Remi. This is indeed a cut and paste error... Fixed version : Spec URL: http://www.bachelot.org/fedora/SPECS/php-pear-Crypt-Blowfish.spec SRPM URL: http://www.bachelot.org/fedora/SRPMS/php-pear-Crypt-Blowfish-1.1.0-0.3.rc2.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 481531] Review Request: perl-Test-Dynamic - Automatic test counting for Test::More
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481531 Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(ita...@ispbrasil. | |com.br) | --- Comment #10 from Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br 2009-02-23 14:46:57 EDT --- look https://mail.endcrypt.com/pipermail/bucardo-general/2009-February/000191.html my real intention is to add bucardo into fedora, but Test::Dynamic is going away, it's not required to bucardo work, only required for testsuit, I don't like to include this package now and orphan it later. Can you take a look in bucardo review request ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487044] Review Request: eee-control - Asus Eee PC hardware control and configuration 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=487044 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski r...@greysector.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||462851 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486758] Review Request: yofrankie-bge - 3D Game with characters from Big Buck Bunny movie
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486758 Hedayat Vatankhah heda...@grad.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||heda...@grad.com --- Comment #2 from Hedayat Vatankhah heda...@grad.com 2009-02-23 14:54:35 EDT --- Just a brief look: 1. Don't forget to fix the version number in your changelog section. Currently it doesn't match with the version of the package itself. 2. I don't know why, but it doesn't run on my system (with an Intel graphic card!) and crashes with a segmentation fault :( -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428567] Review Request: ETL - Extended Template 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=428567 --- Comment #71 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) kwiz...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 14:56:36 EDT --- any news ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 246525] Review Request: libMini - A high-performance terrain rendering 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=246525 --- Comment #27 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) kwiz...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 14:55:17 EDT --- Any news ? Btw I think you were right, the license is indeed LGPLv2 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487044] New: Review Request: eee-control - Asus Eee PC hardware control and configuration tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: eee-control - Asus Eee PC hardware control and configuration tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487044 Summary: Review Request: eee-control - Asus Eee PC hardware control and configuration tool Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: r...@greysector.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/eee-control.spec SRPM URL: http://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/eee-control-0.8.4-1.src.rpm Description: eee-control is an easy-to-use utility that aims to be a one-stop solution for all special Linux Eee PC needs. It allows you to configure hardware and hotkeys, switch between performance levels (very much like Asus' Super Hybrid Engine) and more. rpmlint output: eee-control.i386: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/eee-control-daemon eee-control.i386: W: incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/eee-control-daemon $prog eee-control.i386: W: incoherent-init-script-name eee-control-daemon 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481751] Review Request: fence-agents - 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 --- Comment #8 from Jim Meyering meyer...@redhat.com 2009-02-23 15:14:09 EDT --- Hi Fabio, I looked at http://fabbione.fedorapeople.org/fas/03/fence-agents-3.0.0-3.alpha5.fc11.src.rpm (note the s/02/03/) and see you added README.license and changed fence_vmware_helper.pl to detect write errors among other things. However, mock still fails due to what looks like a yum bug. If you can report that or determine that it's not a problem, I'd say just skip it. Jim -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 470727] Review Request: slimdata - Tools and library for reading and writing slim compressed data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470727 --- Comment #9 from Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org 2009-02-23 15:17:14 EDT --- Please bump post your spec and srpm for each modification you make. It is easier to track. (In reply to comment #7) As for upstream, they do not want to change how they do the sonames as they claim that Debian requires it the way they do it. Shared libraries should have a proper versioned soname. I really doubt Debian forbids that. http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Program-Library-HOWTO/shared-libraries.html You can make one but problems will appear in case upstream decides on a different scheme later on. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Common_Rpmlint_Issues#no-soname Starting with .0 for major is the best way. I still think you should insist on proper soname upstream. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 470727] Review Request: slimdata - Tools and library for reading and writing slim compressed data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470727 --- Comment #10 from Matthew Truch m...@truch.net 2009-02-23 15:37:23 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) Please bump post your spec and srpm for each modification you make. It is easier to track. Sorry, forgot to do that. They're at: http://matt.truch.net/fedora/slimdata.spec http://matt.truch.net/fedora/slimdata-2.6.1b-3.fc11.src.rpm (In reply to comment #7) As for upstream, they do not want to change how they do the sonames as they claim that Debian requires it the way they do it. Shared libraries should have a proper versioned soname. I really doubt Debian forbids that. http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Program-Library-HOWTO/shared-libraries.html You can make one but problems will appear in case upstream decides on a different scheme later on. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Common_Rpmlint_Issues#no-soname Starting with .0 for major is the best way. I still think you should insist on proper soname upstream. I have told them upstream, and I think they will with the next release. For now I have .0 as you suggest. I think it's now kosher wrt sonames, please let me know otherwise. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski r...@greysector.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #32 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski r...@greysector.net 2009-02-23 15:51:58 EDT --- Very nice, however... the %changelog entry you've just added contains an empty line: - Yes, I know I'm being awfully picky. ;) Of course you can fix it after importing, because this package is now APPROVED. Great work and thanks for bearing with me. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487052] New: Review Request: dc3dd - Patched version of GNU dd for use in computer forensics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: dc3dd - Patched version of GNU dd for use in computer forensics https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487052 Summary: Review Request: dc3dd - Patched version of GNU dd for use in computer forensics Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: maxamill...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://maxamillion.fedorapeople.org/dc3dd.spec SRPM URL: http://maxamillion.fedorapeople.org/dc3dd-6.12.2-1.src.rpm Description: dc3dd is a patched version of GNU dd to include a number of features useful for computer forensics. Many of these features were inspired by dcfldd, but were rewritten for dc3dd. * Pattern writes. The program can write a single hexadecimal value or a text string to the output device for wiping purposes. * Piecewise and overall hashing with multiple algorithms and variable size windows. Supports MD5, SHA-1, SHA-256, and SHA-512. Hashes can be computed before or after conversions are made. * Progress meter with automatic input/output file size probing * Combined log for hashes and errors * Error grouping. Produces one error message for identical sequential errors * Verify mode. Able to repeat any transformations done to the input file and compare it to an output. * Ability to split the output into chunks with numerical or alphabetic extensions -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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-agents - 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 --- Comment #9 from Fabio Massimo Di Nitto fdini...@redhat.com 2009-02-23 16:36:11 EDT --- Hi Jim, yes, fixed the problems you reported for the packaging. Jan is also taking care of fixing all the python/perl/C fence agents but that's upstream job and it has been marked blocker for 3.0.0 final release. I am still not able to build in mock but Manuel did report in Comment #6 that it builds fine in koji and it did never fail in my local machines (that are pretty much bare installations) so I am farly confident that it does build :) I can't force you, but i'd like to move forward with this task. Also.. koji has been offline for maintaince for over 48 hours. Tomorrow morning I'll check if a mock fix has been stalling on infrastructure and let you know. Fabio -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski r...@greysector.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review+ |fedora-review? --- Comment #33 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski r...@greysector.net 2009-02-23 16:38:38 EDT --- Looks like I was a bit too hasty. Please remove the jmf library from the original source archive. We can't distribute that, it's non-free. While you're at it, you could also remove the other binaries, since you have to repackage the source archive anyway. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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-agents - 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 Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #10 from Jim Meyering meyer...@redhat.com 2009-02-23 16:46:21 EDT --- ;-) no problem. koji's good enough for me. (sorry to be slow today. I'm supposed to be on PTO all this week) I flipped the fedora-review switch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 246525] Review Request: libMini - A high-performance terrain rendering 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=246525 --- Comment #28 from Rick L Vinyard Jr rviny...@cs.nmsu.edu 2009-02-23 16:47:29 EDT --- Haven't had much time lately to work on it. Maybe in a couple of weeks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #10 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-23 16:49:35 EDT --- waf automatically does the parallel builds, it just doesn't say that it is. ;) Checked in and built. sion has been marked a dead.package and a ticket has been filed with rel-eng to block it. Closing this now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453083] Review Request: Samba4 - Samba4 CIFS and AD server and client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453083 --- Comment #60 from Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com 2009-02-23 16:56:43 EDT --- New packages up for review. This update disables most of Samba4, leaving only what OpenChange needs. It also addresses most of Matthias' review comments. Not sure how to deal with the Python provides issue in comment #47, but the subpackage is disabled so it's probably not worth worrying about for now. Successfully built and installed OpenChange and Evolution-MAPI against this package set. http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/mapi/SPECS/samba4.spec http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/mapi/SRPMS/samba4-4.0.0-2.alpha6.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 478300] Review Request: python-wifi - Python binding for the wireless extensions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478300 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-23 17:07:35 EDT --- python-wifi-0.3.1-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-wifi-0.3.1-2.fc9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476449] Review Request: perl-SystemC-Vregs - Utility routines used by vregs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476449 Brennan Ashton bash...@brennanashton.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Brennan Ashton bash...@brennanashton.com 2009-02-23 17:10:28 EDT --- [X]license field matches the actual license. [x]package installs properly. [X]rpmlint is silent. rpmlint perl-SystemC-Vregs.spec ../SRPMS/perl-SystemC-Vregs-1.461-1.fc10.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/perl-SystemC-Vregs-1.461-1.fc10.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Koji scratch build is fine http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1148426 review+ Sorry for the delay it slipped my mind, I will get that other package I am holding reviewed shortly as well. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478300] Review Request: python-wifi - Python binding for the wireless extensions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478300 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-23 17:07:30 EDT --- python-wifi-0.3.1-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-wifi-0.3.1-2.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 283081] Review Request: condor - Batch system for High Throughput 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=283081 --- Comment #23 from Matthew Farrellee m...@redhat.com 2009-02-23 17:31:44 EDT --- I've pruned some of the Requires for 7.2.1-1. Doing so assumes that all the dependencies do proper SO versioning, which may be a dangerous assumption. Please file new bugs instead of commenting on closed ones. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 462535] Review Request: python-foolscap - Next-generation RPC protocol, intended to replace Perspective Broker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462535 --- Comment #7 from Ruben Kerkhof ru...@rubenkerkhof.com 2009-02-23 17:32:53 EDT --- Ok, I just did a scratchbuild of the latest foolscap (0.3.2), and all seems fine now. Here's the scratchbuild: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1148707 New version here: Spec URL: http://ruben.fedorapeople.org/python-foolscap.spec SRPM URL: http://ruben.fedorapeople.org/python-foolscap-0.3.2-1.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225856] Merge Review: gpm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225856 Robert Scheck redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #17 from Robert Scheck redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de 2009-02-23 17:39:37 EDT --- Well, gpm-1.20.6-1.fc11 has been built in Rawhide which is newer rather the reviewed package, so closing now. Thank you, Zdenek. -- 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 449037] Review Request: afio - cpio compatible archiver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449037 --- Comment #25 from Bruno Cornec bruno.cor...@hp.com 2009-02-23 17:46:09 EDT --- Here is a very complete status made by the current maintainer of afio Koen Holtman k.holtman_at_chello.nl that deserve integration into this report for completeness. Also Cf: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=509287 --- Acting as the upstream afio maintainer I just finished a LONG note on the license status of afio. The note includes a clarifying comment by Mark Brukhartz, the author of the original afio license text. I hope that this note will help the afio user community, by informing the user community on the somewhat complex legal status of the afio license. Cheers, Koen. start of note Issues with the afio license text identified in 2008 About afio == Afio is a fault-tolerant archiver/backup tool for Unix systems. Afio was created in 1985 by Mark Brukhartz. Since then, many contributers and maintainers have added features and bug fixes. Afio is similar to Unix tools like tar, cpio, star, and pax. However, as a feature that these other tools lack: afio has the ability to make compressed archive files that are very fault tolerant against byte errors. This fault tolerant compression has attracted a user base that has been sufficiently large to keep afio alive as a maintained piece of software. Afio project information and link to sources: http://freshmeat.net/projects/afio/ About this note === In 2008, several people have raised the question if afio can be considered 'free' software by modern standards, see for example https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449037 http://spot.livejournal.com/303000.html http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=509287 http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-le...@lists.debian.org/index.html#39478 A number of separate issues were raised in these discussions, this note tries to identify and address all of them. The answer to the question if afio is free depends partly on the definition of free. This note will not try to define the true meaning of free. The main goal of this note is to help the reader to determine if afio is 'free software' or 'open source' or 'freely distributable' by the definition chosen by the reader. To meet that goal, various valid but sometimes contradictory lines of reasoning about 'free' will be described and discussed. This note was written by Koen Holtman (the current afio maintainer) in January/February 2009, based on a review of the discussions on the web and further e-mail discussions with a number of people. In this note, the term 'FOSS' is used to refer to the broad class of free/open/etc software in general. The term 'Linux distro' is used to refer to any GNU/Linux distribution. Disclaimer: the author of this note is not a lawyer, nor does he play one on TV. Full afio license text == The full afio license text (for afio 2.4.6 and later) is reproduced in this section. start * afio.c * * Manipulate archives and files. * * This software was written by Mark Brukhartz at Lachman Associates, * Inc.. Additional code was written by a large cast of people. * * Licensing and (re)distribution * -- * * THE SUMMARY INFORMATION BELOW WAS WRITTEN FOR THE BENEFIT OF * SOFTWARE DISTRIBUTORS * * Because of historical reasons, different parts of this software * package are covered by different licenses. However: * * A) This software package as a whole may be re-distributed by any *method that satisfies the conditions of both the Perl Artistic *License and the GNU Library General Public License. * * B) According to the theory.html file of the Sunsite Archive *Maintainers, this implies that the correct LSM template field *is: * * Copying-policy: LGPL * * C) This software package can also be re-distributed under *particular conditions that are _weaker_ than the Perl Artistic *License combined with the GNU Library General Public License. *Redistribution need only satisfy all four license notices below. * * Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and neither are the Sunsite Archive * Maintainers. * * END OF SUMMARY INFORMATION * * -- * * License notice 1, covering part of this software package. * * [Covers the original 1985 afio code] * * Copyright (c) 1985 Lachman Associates, Inc.. * * This software was written by Mark Brukhartz at Lachman Associates, * Inc.. It may be distributed within the following restrictions: * (1) It may not be sold at a profit. * (2) This credit and notice must remain intact. * This software may be
[Bug 478364] Review Request: perl-Verilog-Readmem - Parse Verilog $readmemh or $readmemb text file
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478364 --- Comment #3 from Brennan Ashton bash...@brennanashton.com 2009-02-23 17:54:15 EDT --- [X]source files match upstream: 56d569e0258e6777f47c85410de58dbb ../SOURCES/Verilog-Readmem-0.02.tar.gz 56d569e0258e6777f47c85410de58dbb Verilog-Readmem-0.02.tar.gz [x]package meets naming and versioning guidelines. [x]specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. [x]dist tag is present. [x]license field matches the actual license. [x]license is open source-compatible. GPL+ or Artistic [FAIL]latest version is being packaged. There is now 0.04 [x]BuildRequires are proper. [x]compiler flags are appropriate. [x]%clean is present. [x]package builds in koji. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1148876 [x]package installs properly. [?]rpmlint is silent. rpmlint perl-Verilog-Readmem.spec ../SRPMS/perl-Verilog-Readmem-0.02-1.fc10.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Verilog-Readmem-0.02-1.fc10.noarch.rpm perl-Verilog-Readmem.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/perl-Verilog-Readmem-0.02/examples/ex1 perl-Verilog-Readmem.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/perl-Verilog-Readmem-0.02/examples/ex2 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. That is your call. [x]final provides and requires are sane: rpm -qp --provides ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Verilog-Readmem-0.02-1.fc10.noarch.rpm perl(Verilog::Readmem) = 0.02 perl-Verilog-Readmem = 0.02-1.fc10 rpm -qp --requires ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Verilog-Readmem-0.02-1.fc10.noarch.rpm perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0) perl(Carp) perl(Exporter) perl(strict) perl(warnings) rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) = 3.0.3-1 [x]%check is present and all tests pass: [x]owns the directories it creates. [x]doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. [x]no duplicates in %files. [?]file permissions are appropriate. see rpmlint [x]no scriptlets present. [x]code, not content. [x]documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. [x]%docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. [x]no headers. [x]no pkgconfig files. Consider upgrading to 0.04 and also confirm you want the example files like 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 480373] Review Request: cilk - Language for multithreaded parallel programming.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480373 Adam Miller maxamill...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Comment #10 from Adam Miller maxamill...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 18:16:45 EDT --- The project I was packaging this up for has been shut down. Closing Review Request, thank you for your time during the review. Very sorry for consuming unnecessary amounts of time. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468579] Review Request: PyQuante - Python Quantum Chemistry
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468579 --- Comment #9 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-02-23 18:21:26 EDT --- Is the line encodings fixing not better be done in the %prep section? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468579] Review Request: PyQuante - Python Quantum Chemistry
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468579
--- Comment #8 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-02-23
18:18:13 EDT ---
- '%{!?python_sitelib: ...' is not needed at the top of the spec file.
- Source URL should be
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/pyquante/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
- (In reply to comment #5)
(In reply to comment #4)
(In reply to comment #1)
PyQuante.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/PyQuante/Minimizers.py 0644
You can add something like 'find *.py -type f | xargs chmod a+x' to fix
this.
If I do that then I get script-without-shebang errors.
Besides, the files in site-packages don't need to be executable, since they
just contain modules used by the frontend software.
Check your python-sitelib directory, only a small minority of the .py files
are
executable. rpmlint shouldn't complain about this.
Will upstream fix this? If the modules only are used by the frontend then the
shebang can be removed (and then the rpmlint errors will disappear, I guess)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476449] Review Request: perl-SystemC-Vregs - Utility routines used by vregs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476449 --- Comment #6 from Chitlesh GOORAH cgoo...@yahoo.com.au 2009-02-23 18:19:25 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-SystemC-Vregs Short Description: Utility routines used by vregs Branches: F-9 F-10 EL-5 Owner: chitlesh -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487067] New: Review Request: autopsy - Graphical front end for The Sleuth Kit Forensics software
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: autopsy - Graphical front end for The Sleuth Kit Forensics software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487067 Summary: Review Request: autopsy - Graphical front end for The Sleuth Kit Forensics software Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: maxamill...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://maxamillion.fedorapeople.org/autopsy.spec SRPM URL: http://maxamillion.fedorapeople.org/autopsy-2.21-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: The Autopsy Forensic Browser is a graphical interface to utilities found in The Sleuth Kit (TSK). TSK is a collection of command line tools that allow you to investigate a Windows or Unix system by examining the hard disk contents. TSK and Autopsy will show you the files, data units, and metadata of NTFS, FAT, EXTxFS, and UFS file system images in a read-only environment. Autopsy allows you to search for specific types of evidence based on keywords, MAC times, hash values, and file types. Autopsy is HTML-based and uses a client-server model. The Autopsy server runs on many UNIX systems and the client can be any platform with an HTML browser. This enables one to create a flexible environment with a central Autopsy server and several remote clients. For incident response scenarios, a CD with The Sleuth Kit and Autopsy can be created to allow the responder read-only remote access to a live suspect system from an HTML-browser on a trusted system. Refer to the README-live.txt file for more details. Autopsy will not modify the original images and the integrity of the images can be verified in Autopsy using MD5 values. There are help pages for the main analysis modes and The Sleuth Kit Informer is a newsletter that adds additional documentation. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #12 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-02-23 18:49:26 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=332991) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=332991) Possible icon for gpscorrelate -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476449] Review Request: perl-SystemC-Vregs - Utility routines used by vregs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476449 Chitlesh GOORAH chitl...@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 #13 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-02-23 18:52:38 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) (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. Sorry, I missed that. 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? In Comment #12 is a self-made icon (based on stuff in /usr/share/pixmaps). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484535] Review Request: kde-plasma-networkmanagement - Plasmoid to control Network Manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484535 --- Comment #15 from Ben Boeckel maths...@gmail.com 2009-02-23 20:17:45 EDT --- Fixed SPEC: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/kde-plasma-networkmanagement/kde-plasma-networkmanagement.spec Fixed SRPM: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/kde-plasma-networkmanagement/kde-plasma-networkmanagement-0.1-0.5.20090217svn.fc10.src.rpm Fixed the licensing line, removed dupe R a, fixed P/O for subpackages and got a better summary/description. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
