[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 #25 from Michal Hlavinka mhlav...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 03:31:31 EDT --- thanks for the review tmpwatch rawhide, F10, F9 : 2.9.13 RHEL-3,4,5 : 2.8.4, 2.9.1, 2.9.7 php rawhide, F10, F9 : 5.2.8 RHEL-3,4,5 : 4.3.2, 4.3.9, 5.1.6 I'll drop versioned dependencies, it seems versions are not needed anymore -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 #6 from Jasper Capel ca...@stone-it.com 2009-02-25 03:52:20 EDT --- Thanks! Updated: specfile: http://bender.newnewyork.nl/review/blahtexml.spec source-rpm: http://bender.newnewyork.nl/review/blahtexml-0.6-3.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 #18 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-02-25 04:15:07 EDT --- Explanations are sane enough and to be honest I am not surprised, which is why I tried to run it from a plain console, too. I'll test the new version too, but gpm was always started and the mouse was not working, so I guess there is (was ? ) a bug somewhere ... maybe in the mouse detection code ? As of twutils and xmms-twin, I would create separate binary packages, even if coming from the same src.rpm. After all they are different projects, aren't they ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #7 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-02-25 04:19:44 EDT --- * When using install (or cp) to install unmodified files yourself, prefer option -p to preserve timestamps. This is considered helpful by users, who want to recognise the age of files (e.g. ancient documentation). Otherwise it shouldn't be overrated. ;) * Our global compiler flags are not used: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags * Please drop Requires: xerces-c in favour of rpmbuild's automatic dependency on the libxerces-c.so.28 SONAME. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #11 from Ruben Kerkhof ru...@rubenkerkhof.com 2009-02-25 04:18:36 EDT --- Ah, the answer is in the logs: Warning: tests will fail (unclean reactor warnings) when pyOpenSSL = 0.7 is used in conjunction with Twisted = 8.1.0 . The workaround is to use the pollreactor instead of the default selectreactor (trial -r poll). This bug is fixed in Twisted trunk, and should appear in the next release of Twisted. pyOpenSSL version: 0.7 Twisted version: 2.5.0 reactor: twisted.internet.selectreactor.SelectReactor object at 0xf790c2b0 See http://foolscap.lothar.com/trac/ticket/62 for details. That might explain why the tests fail for you on Fedora 10, and work on rawhide (it has a newer version of Twisted). I'm only planning to build python-foolscap for rawhide though, so we should be 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 484560] Review Request: pydb - An expanded version of the Python debugger
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484560
--- Comment #2 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-02-25
04:18:13 EDT ---
* Preferably bump Release prior to offering new src.rpm builds. That's
helpful when using rpmdev-diff. Here the 1.25-3.fc10 has been modified
silently.
* Group could be Development/Debuggers
* License: GPLv2+ and the source files mention GPL 2 or later, but file
COPYING is the GPL 3. Can you get upstream to clarify this?
* Instead of
%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.gz
prefer
%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1*
since the manual pages get compressed automatically, and the compression method
and file extension may change.
* Why BuildRequires: fontconfig?
* It's good packaging-practice to run a test-suite target, if available, and
provided that it is not known to be broken:
--- pydb.spec.orig 2009-02-25 00:37:38.0 +0100
+++ pydb.spec 2009-02-25 09:46:13.0 +0100
@@ -44,6 +44,9 @@
make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}
ln -sf ../..%{python_sitelib}/%{name}/%{name}.py
%{buildroot}%{_bindir}/%{name}
+%check
+make check
+
%clean
rm -rf %{buildroot}
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487115] Review Request: perl-NOCpulse-Gritch - Perl throttled email notification for Spacewalk
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487115 Miroslav Suchy msu...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Miroslav Suchy msu...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 04:25:58 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-NOCpulse-Gritch Short Description: Perl throttled email notification for Spacewalk Owners: msuchy Branches: F-10, EL-4, EL-5 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 487148] Review Request: gearmand - A distributed job system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487148 --- Comment #1 from Ruben Kerkhof ru...@rubenkerkhof.com 2009-02-25 04:44:56 EDT --- New version with init script: Spec URL: http://ruben.fedorapeople.org/gearmand.spec SRPM URL: http://ruben.fedorapeople.org/gearmand-0.3-2.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 484560] Review Request: pydb - An expanded version of the Python debugger
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484560
--- Comment #3 from Paulo Roma Cavalcanti pro...@gmail.com 2009-02-25
04:56:40 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
* Preferably bump Release prior to offering new src.rpm builds. That's
helpful when using rpmdev-diff. Here the 1.25-3.fc10 has been modified
silently.
Yes. You were faster than me. The new src.rpm is:
http://people.atrpms.net/~pcavalcanti/srpms/pydb-1.25-4.fc10.src.rpm
* Group could be Development/Debuggers
Done.
* License: GPLv2+ and the source files mention GPL 2 or later, but file
COPYING is the GPL 3. Can you get upstream to clarify this?
* Instead of
%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.gz
prefer
%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1*
Done.
since the manual pages get compressed automatically, and the compression
method
and file extension may change.
* Why BuildRequires: fontconfig?
I do not remember why. Maybe some issue with emacs. I'll go check.
* It's good packaging-practice to run a test-suite target, if available, and
provided that it is not known to be broken:
Included.
I also had already included all Jon Levell's observations.
Thanks to both of you.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479803] Review Request: cabal2spec - generates spec files for Haskell packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479803 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #16 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 04:52:17 EDT --- Thanks - package imported and built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480859] Review Request: diffuse - graphical diff 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=480859 Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 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 484560] Review Request: pydb - An expanded version of the Python debugger
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484560 Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugs.mich...@gmx.net --- Comment #4 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-02-25 05:04:20 EDT --- fontconfig I do not remember why. Maybe some issue with emacs. Hint: Add a comment in the spec file. ;-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 #8 from Jasper Capel ca...@stone-it.com 2009-02-25 05:04:55 EDT --- Thanks, all done: specfile: http://bender.newnewyork.nl/review/blahtexml.spec source-rpm: http://bender.newnewyork.nl/review/blahtexml-0.6-4.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 487281] New: Review Request: eGroupware - A web-based groupware suite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: eGroupware - A web-based groupware suite https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487281 Summary: Review Request: eGroupware - A web-based groupware suite Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: pa...@hubbitus.spb.su QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/Fedora9/eGroupware/eGroupware.spec SRPM URL: http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/Fedora9/eGroupware/eGroupware-1.6.001-7.fc9.src.rpm Description: eGroupware is a web-based groupware suite written in PHP. Include many usefully applications such as: (bug)tracker, Site management, web-mail client, project management (time planning, Gannt diagrams, HRM), TODO lists, address book, import-export in many formats, synchronization with many standalone clients such us Thunderbird, Outlook, mobile phones, FAQ management, and many many more. Some additional questions/things for the future reviewer: 1) koji build successful: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1168509 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1168381 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1168637 2) rpmlint on src.rpm and spec file is silent. rpmlint on binary packages is NOT silent, but most of errors is gone, and few are: 2.1) Many W: no-documentation - I extract all documentation what was be able to find, but few packages do not contain it at all. I think it is not critical. 2.2) E: zero-length. This files has zero length in upstream tarball. I can delete it, but I prefer leave it as is (what if it will be filled in future?). 2.3) Tail of errors: $ rpmlint eGroupware-*.rpm | egrep -v 'W: no-documentation|E: zero-length' eGroupware-core.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/cron.d/eGroupware eGroupware-gallery.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/egroupware/gallery/gallery2 ../../gallery2 30 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 43 errors, 20 warnings. 2.3.1) Is really /etc/cron.d/eGroupware should be marked as config?? Why? I can't find anything in documentation/guidelines on this theme. My thing it is not config and reported by rpmlint erroneously. 2.3.2) Symlink is not dangling. It is relied to installed gallery2 package in system and it is already mentioned in Requires. So, this error happened only unless installation was done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487114] Review Request: gvrpcd - A program for announcing VLANs using GVRP.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487114 --- Comment #1 from Jasper Capel ca...@stone-it.com 2009-02-25 05:50:14 EDT --- Updated files, made it respect the global compiler flags, and preserve timestamps when installing files. Spec URL: http://bender.newnewyork.nl/review/gvrpcd.spec SRPM URL: http://bender.newnewyork.nl/review/gvrpcd-1.1-2.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 481224] Review Request: rabbitmq-server - An AMQP server written in Erlang
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481224
--- Comment #10 from Hubert Plociniczak hub...@lshift.net 2009-02-25
06:10:37 EDT ---
Spec URL: http://www.lshift.net/~hubert/rabbitmq-server.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.lshift.net/~hubert/rabbitmq-server-1.5.3-1.src.rpm
These include fixes for all the problems you mentioned apart from that:
* you should consider using
rm %{_maindir}/{LICENSE,LICENSE-MPL-RabbitMQ,INSTALL}
instead of
rm %{_maindir}/LICENSE %{_maindir}/LICENSE-MPL-RabbitMQ %{_maindir}/INSTALL
There reason for this is that this pattern is available for some newer version
of rpmbuild, but we also tend to make releases on machines that have version
4.4.2.1 installed and does not support it.
It is only a shortcut, but works ok without it. I hope you are ok with that?
I also included few other fixes, you will probably see them in the spec 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 487296] New: Review Request: sssd - System Security Services Daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: sssd - System Security Services Daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487296 Summary: Review Request: sssd - System Security Services Daemon Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: jhro...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://jhrozek.fedorapeople.org/sssd/sssd.spec SRPM URL: http://jhrozek.fedorapeople.org/sssd/sssd-0.1.0-2.fc10.src.rpm Description: Provides a set of daemons to manage access to remote directories and authentication mechanisms. It provides an NSS and PAM interface toward the system and a pluggable backend system to connect to multiple different account sources. It is also the basis to provide client auditing and policy services for projects like FreeIPA. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #12 from David Carter dcar...@entertain-me.com 2009-02-25 06:43:59 EDT --- Yes, it build fine under koji with dist-f11. I'm unable to build it under mock at this time as it has some unrelated yum issues. So I guess as a practice reviewer, I'm OK with it as it is. Now you just need someone authorized to approve :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487296] Review Request: sssd - System Security Services Daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487296 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Hrozek jhro...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 06:44:08 EDT --- I should note that sssd is currently not buildable with libtevent,libtdb and libldb versions of packages available in Fedora. These are also requirements of samba4 that is under review, too. However, a reviewer can already look at the specfile and/or build sssd with the in-tree versions of libraries and headers, there's a couple of hints in the BUILD.txt file in the 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 487312] New: Review Request: tuned - A dynamic adaptive system tuning daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: tuned - A dynamic adaptive system tuning daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487312 Summary: Review Request: tuned - A dynamic adaptive system tuning daemon Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: pknir...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://pknirsch.fedorapeople.org/src/tuned.spec SRPM URL: http://pknirsch.fedorapeople.org/src/tuned-0.1.0-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: The tuned package contains a daemon that tunes system settings dynamically. It is part of the Fedora 11 Power Management feature (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/PowerManagement) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487312] Review Request: tuned - A dynamic adaptive system tuning daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487312 Phil Knirsch pknir...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||484668 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477719] Review Request: lxsession-edit - Simple G UI to configure what’s automatically started in LXDE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477719 Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||lxsession-edit-0.1-1.fc9 Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE --- Comment #4 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de 2009-02-25 08:53:54 EDT --- lxsession-edit-0.1-1.fc10 successfully moved from dist-f10-updates-candidate into dist-f9-updates by bodhi lxsession-edit-0.1-1.fc9 successfully moved from dist-f9-updates-candidate into dist-f9-updates by bodhi (somehow bodhi fails to update bugzilla) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483728] Review Request: kde-plasma-ihatethecashew - Gets rid of the cashew on KDE Workspace
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483728 Milos Jakubicek xja...@fi.muni.cz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |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 487263] Review request: preferences-menus - Categorized submenus for the Preferences menu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487263 --- Comment #2 from Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 09:43:30 EDT --- I've added the versioned requires, add a comment and even did the -p. Then, I've queried upstream (myself), but upstream said no. New files in the same location. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 --- Comment #1 from Ondrej Vasik ova...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 10:11:19 EDT --- First check: I'm a bit worried about the simple groupadd in post and simple groupdel in postun ... service is quite common name for group and I could imagine that group being used for service guys on some machines... by simple removal of libservicelog package, you will delete that group without warning - imho too dangerous... I remember case of Amanda (as user) and troubles which were caused by amanda 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 487349] New: BASH debugger, the BASH symbolic debugger
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: BASH debugger, the BASH symbolic debugger https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487349 Summary: BASH debugger, the BASH symbolic debugger Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://bashdb.sourceforge.net/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: pro...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Description of problem: Spec URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~pcavalcanti/specs/bashdb.spec SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~pcavalcanti/srpms/bashdb-4.0_0.2-1.fc10.src.rpm The Bash Debugger Project is a source-code debugger for bash, which follows the gdb command syntax. The purpose of the BASH debugger is to check what is going on “inside” a bash script, while it executes: * Start a script, specifying conditions that might affect its behaviour. * Stop a script at certain conditions (break points). * Examine the state of a script. * Experiment, by changing variable values on the fly. The version 4.0 series is a complete rewrite of the previous series. Bashdb can be used with ddd: ddd --debugger /usr/bin/bashdb script-name. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480102] Review Request: weka - Waikato Environment for Knowledge Analysis
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480102 Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|michel.syl...@gmail.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487349] Review Request: bashdb - BASH debugger, the BASH symbolic debugger
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487349 Paulo Roma Cavalcanti pro...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|BASH debugger, the BASH |Review Request: bashdb - |symbolic debugger |BASH debugger, the BASH ||symbolic debugger -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480102] Review Request: weka - Waikato Environment for Knowledge Analysis
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480102 Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||michel.syl...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com 2009-02-25 10:47:25 EDT --- I'm actually using Weka right now, so I'll take the review. Will post review notes in a bit. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484560] Review Request: pydb - An expanded version of the Python debugger
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484560 --- Comment #5 from Paulo Roma Cavalcanti pro...@gmail.com 2009-02-25 10:50:48 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) fontconfig I do not remember why. Maybe some issue with emacs. Hint: Add a comment in the spec file. ;-) fontconfig does not seem to be necessary, indeed. I removed the BR, and updated the spec and .src.rpm, but did not change the release (it is a very small change). I am also submitting bashdb, and I would appreciate if both of you could take a look at it. Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468806] Review Request: python-dbsprockets - A package for creation of web widgets directly from database definitions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468806 Toshio Ernie Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468230] Review Request: TurboGears2 - Next generation Front-to-back web development megaframework built on Pylons
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468230 Bug 468230 depends on bug 468806, which changed state. Bug 468806 Summary: Review Request: python-dbsprockets - A package for creation of web widgets directly from database definitions https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468806 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487349] Review Request: bashdb - BASH debugger, the BASH symbolic debugger
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487349
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 2009-02-25
11:21:25 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:
bashdb.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/bashdb/getopts_long.sh 0644
= this one is ignorable, the script is to be used from inside bashdb
emacs-bashdb.noarch: W: no-documentation
= ignorable
[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.
[!] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type as specified by sources: GPLv2+
License type as specified by spec: GPLv2
= unless I am mistaken, please fix the spec
[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: 9a4da7ff53cbb072140b1584385bf87eff26c824
bashdb-4.0-0.2.tar.bz2
[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 %{buildroot}.
[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.
Ttested in F10/x86_64
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[x] File based requires are sane.
[x] %check is present and the test passes.
=== Issues ===
1. Please fix the license tag before commit
=== Notes ===
1. I would add INSTALL=install -p to the make install line
*** 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 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 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||0.13-4.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-25 11:22:33 EDT --- php-pear-Crypt-Blowfish-1.1.0-0.3.rc2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477719] Review Request: lxsession-edit - Simple G UI to configure what’s automatically started in LXDE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477719 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-25 11:26:00 EDT --- lxsession-edit-0.1-1.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477719] Review Request: lxsession-edit - Simple G UI to configure what’s automatically started in LXDE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477719 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-25 11:24:56 EDT --- lxsession-edit-0.1-1.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477719] Review Request: lxsession-edit - Simple G UI to configure what’s automatically started in LXDE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477719 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|lxsession-edit-0.1-1.fc9|0.1-1.fc9 Resolution|CURRENTRELEASE |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 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 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-25 11:23:59 EDT --- muse-1.0-0.4.rc1.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update muse'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2009-2070 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 485954] Review Request: marlin - A Sound Sample Editor for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485954 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-25 11:23:28 EDT --- marlin-0.13-4.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483116] Review Request: grnotify - Google Reader Notifier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483116 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-25 11:24:44 EDT --- grnotify-1.1.2-4.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update grnotify'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2009-2075 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480944] Review Request: perl-Test-Harness-Straps - Detailed analysis of test results
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480944 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-25 11:24:32 EDT --- perl-Test-Harness-Straps-0.30-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229 --- Comment #48 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-25 11:26:32 EDT --- qbittorrent-0.9.3-1.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|0.4.1-6.fc9 |0.4.1-6.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 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 --- Comment #39 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-25 11:23:16 EDT --- kde-plasma-translatoid-0.4.1-6.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 --- Comment #40 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-25 11:23:40 EDT --- kde-plasma-translatoid-0.4.1-6.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|1.2.1-2.fc10|0.9.3-1.fc9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 449869] Review Request: tasque - A simple task management app
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449869 Bug 449869 depends on bug 468055, which changed state. Bug 468055 Summary: broken dependency on F-9 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468055 What|Old Value |New Value Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED 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 487365] New: Review Request: eclipse-oprofile - Eclipse plugin for OProfile integration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: eclipse-oprofile - Eclipse plugin for OProfile integration https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487365 Summary: Review Request: eclipse-oprofile - Eclipse plugin for OProfile integration Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: kseba...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://ksebasti.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-oprofile.spec SRPM URL: http://ksebasti.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-oprofile-0.1.0-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Eclipse plugins to integrate OProfile's powerful profiling capabilities in the workbench. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486648] Review Request: simple-kiosk - Tools for creating a kiosk session
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486648 --- Comment #3 from Warren Togami wtog...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 11:50:51 EDT --- This package will be renamed to browser-kiosk and the source tree will be pushed to a public URL. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475823] Review Request: menu-cache - Caching mechanism for freedesktop.org compilant menus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475823
Sebastian Vahl fed...@deadbabylon.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Sebastian Vahl fed...@deadbabylon.de 2009-02-25 11:55:57
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: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1172968
[x] Rpmlint output:
menu-cache.i386: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/menu-cache-0.2.2/ChangeLog
menu-cache-devel.i386: W: no-documentation
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
[!] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[!] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: LGPLv2+
[-] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package:
MD5SUM upstream package:
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch, OR:
[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.
[-] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[!] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[x] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x] 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.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[-] 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: f11-i386
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1172968
[x] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[x] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
=== Issues ===
1. most files in menu-cache-gen are licensed under LGPLv2+, so the License of
the whole package should be LGPLv2+
2. menu-cache-devel requires glib2-devel which requires pkgconfig.
3. There was no new release of menu-cache in two months. So the ChangeLog entry
in %doc should be addded when it is really included in the package.
=== Final Notes ===
1. As discussed in Jabber, fix the above items and the package is approved.
*** 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 477719] Review Request: lxsession-edit - Simple G UI to configure what’s automatically started in LXDE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477719 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|0.1-1.fc9 |0.1-1.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483730] Review Request: kde-plasma-translatoid - A Google Translation Plasmoid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483730 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||0.4.1-6.fc9 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 483116] Review Request: grnotify - Google Reader Notifier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483116 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-25 11:25:12 EDT --- grnotify-1.1.2-4.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing-newkey update grnotify'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F9/FEDORA-2009-2077 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||1.1.0-0.3.rc2.fc10 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 449869] Review Request: tasque - A simple task management app
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449869 Bug 449869 depends on bug 468055, which changed state. Bug 468055 Summary: broken dependency on F-9 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468055 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475823] Review Request: menu-cache - Caching mechanism for freedesktop.org compilant menus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475823 Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@deadbabylon.de Flag||fedora_requires_release_not ||e? --- Comment #4 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de 2009-02-25 12:06:02 EDT --- Thanks for the review. I will fix the issues you raised after import. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: menu-cache Short Description: Caching mechanism for freedesktop.org compilant menus Owners: cwickert svahl 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 475823] Review Request: menu-cache - Caching mechanism for freedesktop.org compilant menus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475823 Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora_requires_release_not |fedora-cvs? |e? | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487312] Review Request: tuned - A dynamic adaptive system tuning daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487312 Thomas Woerner twoer...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||twoer...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|twoer...@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 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 #61 from Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 12:35:07 EDT --- Indeed, all my earlier comments have been taken care of, thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 #6 from Adel Gadllah adel.gadl...@gmail.com 2009-02-25 13:01:05 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) NOTE: The files in this packages conflict with the ones shipped in xorg-x11-server-Xorg. This is intentional, it is going to replace them (X will than depend on this package). It might be worth adding a Conflicts: xorg-x11-server-Xorg (last fedora-setup-keyboard.py version-(release+1)) for this. Well can't do this unless the xorg package is changed to use this fedora-setup-keyboard. (As xorg builds might be made during this review), besides it already conflicts with this packaged via file conflict. Fixed the other 2 issues (license file and hal requirement) http://193.200.113.196/apache2-default/rpm/fedora-setup-keyboard.spec http://193.200.113.196/apache2-default/rpm/fedora-setup-keyboard-0.3-1.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 487312] Review Request: tuned - A dynamic adaptive system tuning daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487312
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Woerner twoer...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 13:14:58
EDT ---
$ rpmlint tuned-0.1.0-1.fc10.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
OK
$ rpmlint tuned-0.1.0-1.fc10.noarch.rpm
tuned.noarch: W: incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/tuned $prog
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
OK
$ rpmlint tuned-utils-0.1.0-1.fc10.noarch.rpm
tuned-utils.noarch: W: no-documentation
tuned-utils.noarch: E: devel-dependency kernel-debuginfo
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings.
Hm, I wonder why there is a devel-dependency for kernel-debuginfo. I see that
the scripts are systemtap scripts. Therefore this should be OK.
Packaging guidelines:
Can you please fix the URL for the git tree to be consistent and maybe add a
description how to get the proper version from git? Please also fix the url in
the wiki page. (See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL)
Can you please use %(mktemp -ud
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XX) for Buildroot? (See:
BuildRoot tag at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines)
Please fix whitespaces in the GPL headers (example: tuned).
Why is tuningplugins/__init__.py empty?
Why is there a reference to configure in INSTALL. There is no configure script
at all.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 #62 from Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 13:14:32 EDT --- Package builds fine in mock Formal review: rpmlint output: samba4.x86_64: E: no-binary samba4-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. The warning is ignorable, the error is caused by the main package being an empty shell for now. I understand this is just temporary, until samba4 gets released, so I don't think this is an issue. package name: ok spec file name: ok packaging guidelines: ok; I guess you could be proactive and adapt to the coming recommendation of %global over %define, but thats not ratified yet, afaik license: ok license field: ok, but it would be nice to specify more exactly what parts are LGPL license file: ok spec language: ok spec legible: ok upstream source: ok buildable: ok buildrequires: ok excludearch: ok locale handling: ok ldconfig: ok relocatable: ok directory ownership: ok duplicate files: ok permissions: ok, I notice that pidl uses %defattr(-,root,root,-) whereas the others use %defattr(-,root,root). Accident ? The former is preferred, I think %clean: ok macro use: ok permissible content: ok large docs: ok %doc content: ok headers: ok pkgconfig: ok shared libs: ok -devel requires: ok, it requires -libs la files: ok gui apps: ok overlap with other packages: NOT ok. -pidl includes things that are owned by other packages, notably perl-Parse-Yapp %install: ok utf8 filenames: ok summary: - consider using %global - add license comment - consider cleaning up %defattr variation - fix -pidl conflicts -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #12 from Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 13:20:33 EDT --- Oded: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=evolution-mapi -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453395] Review Request: OpenChange - Microsoft Exchange access with native protocols
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453395 --- Comment #19 from Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 13:19:36 EDT --- One last update in preparation for a formal review. Just fixes some minor rpmlint warnings. http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/mapi/SPECS/openchange.spec http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/mapi/SRPMS/openchange-0.8-3.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 481040] Review Request: skyeye - integrated simulation environment for typical Embedded Computer Systems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481040 Chitlesh GOORAH chitl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aanj...@tuxmaniac.com --- Comment #5 from Chitlesh GOORAH chitl...@gmail.com 2009-02-25 13:21:44 EDT --- Aanjhaan, could you please have a look at this package and see if you can improve it. Thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487349] Review Request: bashdb - BASH debugger, the BASH symbolic debugger
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487349
--- Comment #2 from Paulo Roma Cavalcanti pro...@gmail.com 2009-02-25
13:46:26 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
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:
bashdb.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/bashdb/getopts_long.sh 0644
= this one is ignorable, the script is to be used from inside bashdb
emacs-bashdb.noarch: W: no-documentation
= ignorable
[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.
[!] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type as specified by sources: GPLv2+
License type as specified by spec: GPLv2
= unless I am mistaken, please fix the spec
[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: 9a4da7ff53cbb072140b1584385bf87eff26c824
bashdb-4.0-0.2.tar.bz2
[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 %{buildroot}.
[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.
Ttested in F10/x86_64
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[x] File based requires are sane.
[x] %check is present and the test passes.
=== Issues ===
1. Please fix the license tag before commit
Changed to GPLv2+
=== Notes ===
1. I would add INSTALL=install -p to the make install line
Done. I also added a check section.
%install
rm -rf %{buildroot}
make install INSTALL=install -p DESTDIR=%{buildroot}
%{__rm} -f %{buildroot}%{_infodir}/dir
%check
make check
Thanks.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453395] Review Request: OpenChange - Microsoft Exchange access with native protocols
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453395 Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mcla...@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 453395] Review Request: OpenChange - Microsoft Exchange access with native protocols
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453395 Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mcla...@redhat.com --- Comment #20 from Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 13:54:59 EDT --- Package builds ok in mock rpmlint on the resulting rpms: openchange.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libmapi.so.0.8 e...@glibc_2.2.5 openchange.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libocpf.so.0.8 e...@glibc_2.2.5 openchange-python.x86_64: W: no-documentation openchange-python.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/openchange/provision.py 0644 openchange-python.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/openchange/__init__.py 0644 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 3 warnings. The warnings are not serious, not sure what to make of the script error, it looks bogus to 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 486269] Review Request: levien-inconsolata-fonts - Inconsolata fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486269 --- Comment #5 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-25 14:07:07 EDT --- Yeah, the old font fails exactly the same way, so it must be a change somewhere in rawhide. ;( http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1167442name=build.log + fontforge -script - /builddir/build/SOURCES/Inconsolata.sfd Copyright (c) 2000-2008 by George Williams. Executable based on sources from 16:11 GMT 24-Dec-2008. Library based on sources from 16:11 GMT 24-Dec-2008. File stdin, line 2 while ( i $argc ) ^ SyntaxError: invalid syntax error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.e4UUpX (%build) any ideas? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486869] Review Request: flickrnet - A .NET library to interact with Flickr
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486869 Paul Lange pala...@gmx.de 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 487392] New: Review Request: crash-catcher - apps crash detecting daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: crash-catcher - apps crash detecting daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487392 Summary: Review Request: crash-catcher - apps crash detecting daemon Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: jmosk...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~jmoskovc/crash-catcher.spec SRPM URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~jmoskovc/crash-catcher-0.0.1-2.fc10.src.rpm Description: CrashCatcher is a tool to help users to detect defects in applications and to create a bug report with all informations needed by maintainer to fix it. It uses plugin system to extend its functionality. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487392] Review Request: crash-catcher - apps crash detecting daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487392 Jiri Moskovcak jmosk...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jla...@redhat.com, ||zprik...@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 487392] Review Request: crash-catcher - apps crash detecting daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487392 Dan Horák d...@danny.cz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|d...@danny.cz 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 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 #12 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-02-25 15:30:56 EDT --- Coordinated fixes with upstream. Rpmlint output is now clean. http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/PyQuante.spec http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/PyQuante-1.6.3-1.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 480102] Review Request: weka - Waikato Environment for Knowledge Analysis
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480102
--- Comment #2 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel.syl...@gmail.com
2009-02-25 15:31:08 EDT ---
General guidelines:
MUST
+ rpmlint
+ package name
+ spec file name
+ package guideline-compliant
+ license complies with guidelines
+ license field accurate
+ license file not deleted
+ spec in US English
+ spec legible
+ source matches upstream
+ builds under = 1 archs, others excluded
noarch
+ build dependencies complete
N/A locales handled using %find_lang, no %{_datadir}/locale
+ own all directories
+ no dupes in %files
+ permission
+ %clean RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ macros used consistently
+ Package contains code
+ large docs = -doc (-javadoc)
+ doc not runtime dependent
- desktop file uses desktop-file-install
Desktop file uses desktop-file-install, but the path to the icon is wrong:
/usr/share/icons/weka.ico rather than just
1. weka (which is preferable) or
2. the correct path (/usr/share/icons/hicolor/yadda yadda)
It looks like .ico files are not automatically picked up by GNOME's menu,
so I'd consider converting the icon to .png (it makes it smaller as well),
in which case you can just refer to it as Icon=weka. Otherwise, you'd have
to use the complete path
Also, icon caches are not updated:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#GTK.2B_icon_cache
+ clean buildroot before install
• filenames UTF-8
SHOULD
+ package build in mock on all architectures
+ package functioned as described
+ scriplets are sane
+ other subpackages should require versioned base
+ require package not files
Java-specific:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Java
- Java requirement must be versioned (see BuildRequires and Requires)
Otherwise, it looks fine, so I can approve this after the fixes are made.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484560] Review Request: pydb - An expanded version of the Python debugger
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484560 --- Comment #6 from Jon Levell fed...@coralbark.net 2009-02-25 15:45:40 EDT --- Personally, I would have put the BR change in the changelog and bumped the release. Aside from that, I can't see any new issues - I'll go take a look at bashdb -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453395] Review Request: OpenChange - Microsoft Exchange access with native protocols
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453395 --- Comment #21 from Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 15:49:20 EDT --- package name: matches project name, ok spec file name: ok packaging guidelines: ok license: ok license field: ok, but should it mentioned the idl license ? license file: ok spec language: ok spec legibility: ok upstream sources: needs to include the full src url buildable: ok buildrequires: ok locale handling: ok ldconfig: ok relocatable: ok directory ownership: ok duplicate files: ok file permissions: ok %clean: ok macro use: ok permissible content: ok large docs: ok %doc content: ok header files: ok static libraries: ok pkgconfig files: ok shared libs: ok devel package deps: ok libtool archives: ok gui apps: ok file ownership: ok %install: ok utf8 filenames: ok summary: - fix the source url -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476832] Review Request: mydns - serve DNS records directly from an SQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476832 --- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-25 16:11:30 EDT --- mydns-1.2.8.25-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mydns-1.2.8.25-1.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453395] Review Request: OpenChange - Microsoft Exchange access with native protocols
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453395
--- Comment #22 from Jeffrey C. Ollie j...@ocjtech.us 2009-02-25 16:21:22
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #20)
openchange-python.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/openchange/provision.py 0644
openchange-python.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/openchange/__init__.py 0644
You get these errors when a file starts with #!yadda but does not have
executable permissions. To get rid of the rpmlint warnings I use:
%{__sed} -i -r -e '/^#!/,1d' filename
which will delete the first line if it starts with a #!
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC 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 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #4 from Jakub Hrozek jhro...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 16:31:59 EDT --- Built for devel: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1177192 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487421] New: Review Request: libyaml - YAML 1.1 parser and emitter written in C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libyaml - YAML 1.1 parser and emitter written in C https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487421 Summary: Review Request: libyaml - YAML 1.1 parser and emitter written in C Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: jecke...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://jeckersb.fedorapeople.org/libyaml/libyaml.spec SRPM URL: http://jeckersb.fedorapeople.org/libyaml/libyaml-0.1.2-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: This package is needed as a build requirement for PyYAML's C bindings (I also maintain PyYAML). YAML is a data serialization format designed for human readability and interaction with scripting languages. LibYAML is a YAML parser and emitter written in C. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478668] Review Request: lxmusic - Lightweight XMMS2 client with simple user interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478668 --- Comment #8 from Martin-Gomez Pablo pablo.martin-go...@laposte.net 2009-02-25 16:42:31 EDT --- My bad, I misread. With gtk2-devel, LXMusic build without problems (well, with some warnings). But is GTK2 needed to run LXMusic (all the information I find was confuse), if so it should be a dependency, isn't 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 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 #63 from Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 16:46:51 EDT --- Latest (hopefully final) update. http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/mapi/SPECS/samba4.spec http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/mapi/SRPMS/samba4-4.0.0-3.alpha6.fc10.src.rpm summary: - consider using %global I think I'll hold off on this until it's ratified and just convert all my packages en masse. - add license comment Done. Simo said the library licenses are still subject to GPL/LGPL fluctuation, but everything else is GPL. - consider cleaning up %defattr variation Done. - fix -pidl conflicts Done, I think. Only conflicts I found were: /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/Parse/Yapp /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/Parse/Yapp/Driver.pm I removed Samba's copy and added perl-Parse-Yapp as a build requirement. Were there any others? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478668] Review Request: lxmusic - Lightweight XMMS2 client with simple user interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478668 --- Comment #9 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de 2009-02-25 16:54:50 EDT --- No need to list gtk2 as a Requires:, rpm will pick up requirements for libraries automatically: $ rpm -qp --requires lxmusic-0.2.3-1.fc10.i386.rpm | grep gtk libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 $ rpm -q --whatprovides libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 gtk2-2.14.7-1.fc10.i386 $ So as you can see the package gets installed automatically (if it isn't already). If you have more questions, don't hesitate to ask. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487365] Review Request: eclipse-oprofile - Eclipse plugin for OProfile integration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487365
Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|overh...@redhat.com
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 17:09:33
EDT ---
Thanks for the submission. Here's the review. Lines beginning with X need
attention; those beginning with * are okay:
* verify the final provides and requires of the binary RPMs
X make sure lines are = 80 characters
- please add some line continuations to fix this
* package successfully compiles and builds
* BuildRequires are proper
* macros fine
* package is named appropriately
* it is legal for Fedora to distribute this
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* specfile name matches %{name}
* md5sum matches upstream
- other than timestamp differences, my generated tarball matches
* skim the summary and description for typos, etc.
X summary and description good
- please add Eclipse somewhere in the Summary. Something like Eclipse
plugin for OProfile.
- please remove (Incubation) from the summary
- remove powerful in the description. The description could also mention
the CDT.
* correct buildroot
* %{?dist} used correctly
* license text included in package and marked with %doc
* packages meets FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/)
X rpmlint on this package.srpm gives no output
$ rpmlint eclipse-oprofile-0.1.0-1.fc10.src.rpm
eclipse-oprofile.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab:
line 4)
eclipse-oprofile.src: W: strange-permission eclipse-oprofile-fetch-src.sh 0775
Please fix both of these things. Just make the fetch script 644 or something
and modify the instructions for generating the tarball to be: sh
./eclipse-oprofile-fetch-src.sh.
* changelog format okay
* Summary tag does not end in a period
* no PreReq
* specfile is legible
* specfile written in American English
* no -doc sub-package necessary
* one native bit has no rpath, static linking, etc.
* no config files
* not a GUI app
* no -devel necessary
* install section begins with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot}
* no translations so no locale handling
* no Requires(pre,post)
* package not relocatable
* package contains code
* package owns all directories and files
* no %files duplicates
* file permissions fine
* %clean present
* %doc files do not affect runtime
* not a web app
* package includes license text in the package and marks it with %doc
* run rpmlint on the binary RPMs = no output
$ rpmlint eclipse-oprofile-*
eclipse-oprofile.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/security/console.apps/opcontrol
eclipse-oprofile.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/pam.d/opcontrol
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
This is fine 'cause it needs to be there for correct use of pam/consolehelper,
right?
* I verified that it installs and that the oprofile feature is available.
Could you post a test project to try to verify that the functionallity works?
I'm getting the OProfile view but not seeing any results.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC 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 --- Comment #2 from Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 17:28:47 EDT --- Also, what's the separate user used for - there's nothing obvious in this package that explains why it needs to be this way. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 474044] Review Request: libzdb - A small, fast, and easy to use database API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474044 --- Comment #17 from Bernard Johnson bjohn...@symetrix.com 2009-02-25 17:50:24 EDT --- (In reply to comment #16) If we did include it, though, we would offer the same dual-/multi-licensing options as the upstream tarball (and our License: GPLv3+ tag may not be explicit enough to signal our intent). And with that, somebody could choose to accept the dual-licensing and would be bound to term 1.b.ii, which I think is a problem, as for example, we don't do that for Fedora. Can I modify the EXCEPTIONS file to include this text at the top?: NOTE: This file is included for reference reasons only. The Fedora project only offers this software under the GPLv3+ and MIT licenses. All files are GPLv3+ licenses, except the following files which are MIT licensed: src/exceptions/assert.c src/exceptions/AssertException.h If you wish to exercise the dual license, please obtain the sources from: http://www.tildeslash.com/libzdb/ = Seems like that would make it un-mistakable in conjunction with the package license tag. If I am not allowed to modify that file, then a README.Fedora is probably the best we can do. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 474044] Review Request: libzdb - A small, fast, and easy to use database API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474044 --- Comment #18 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 17:53:39 EDT --- I see no reason why you could not modify that 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 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 #7 from Peter Hutterer peter.hutte...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 17:53:19 EDT --- I'll add the conflicts line once the package is available and the xorg-x11-server package got its requires on 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 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 Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #64 from Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 17:57:18 EDT --- Were there any others? I think /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/Parse is multiply owned. Not sure if thats intentional, or if there is some official owner. Easiest way out might be to Require perl(Parse::Yapp) - or do you pick that Requires up anyway ? The rest looks ok, so approved under the assumption that you have a Requires for an owner of that directory. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484560] Review Request: pydb - An expanded version of the Python debugger
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484560 --- Comment #7 from Paulo Roma Cavalcanti pro...@gmail.com 2009-02-25 18:20:43 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) Personally, I would have put the BR change in the changelog and bumped the release. Aside from that, I can't see any new issues - I'll go take a look at bashdb I registered the BR change, but I kept the release. I do not like bumping releases when the changes are done in the same day. Bashdb has already been approved, but thanks 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 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 #65 from Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 18:21:49 EDT --- (In reply to comment #64) I think /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/Parse is multiply owned. Not sure if thats intentional, or if there is some official owner. Easiest way out might be to Require perl(Parse::Yapp) - or do you pick that Requires up anyway ? Not sure if build requirements get propagated as requirements with Perl modules. I'll just make it an explicit requirement, to be sure. Thanks for the review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #66 from Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 18:29:53 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: samba4 Short Description: Samba version 4 Owners: mbarnes Branches: InitialCC: simo -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481040] Review Request: skyeye - integrated simulation environment for typical Embedded Computer Systems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481040 --- Comment #6 from Aanjhan Ranganathan aanj...@tuxmaniac.com 2009-02-25 18:52:01 EDT --- Firstly, I updated the SPEC and SRPM for the latest upstream release which was done 4 days back. Will look into the warnings now. But in the meanwhile request a review of the update. http://tuxmaniac.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/skyeye.spec http://tuxmaniac.fedorapeople.org/skyeye-1.2.7-1.rc1.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 467154] Review Request: libvirt-qpid - An interface with libvirt using QMF (qpid modeling framework) which utilizes the Advanced Message Queuing 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=467154 David Lutterkort lut...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #10 from David Lutterkort lut...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 19:08:42 EDT --- based on the Koji scratch build in http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1177393, a few minor things remain to be fixed: OK - Package name OK - License info is accurate OK - License tag is correct and licenses are approved OK - License files are installed as %doc OK - Specfile name OK - Specfile is legible OK - No prebuilt binaries included FIX - BuildRoot value (one of the recommended values) See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag OK - PreReq not used FIX - Source md5sum matches upstream No upstream release; make Source a URL to the download for the tarball OK - No hardcoded pathnames OK - Package owns all the files it installs OK - 'Requires' create needed unowned directories OK - Package builds successfully on i386 and x86_64 (mock) OK - BuildRequires sufficient FIX - File permissions set properly rpmlint complains that /usr/share/doc/libvirt-qpid-0.2.12 and /usr/share/libvirt-qpid are mode 02755 OK - Macro usage is consistent FIX - rpmlint is silent See above warnings about directory perms OK - Proper debuginfo packages -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453395] Review Request: OpenChange - Microsoft Exchange access with native protocols
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453395 --- Comment #23 from Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com 2009-02-25 19:07:35 EDT --- Source URL fixed. Updated license tag: the code is GPLv3+ not GPLv3, and the IDL license appears to be public domain. Most files under site-packages are executable, so I overrode the permissions on those Python files. http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/mapi/SPECS/openchange.spec http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/mapi/SRPMS/openchange-0.8-4.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454668] Review Request: gupnp-vala - vala bindings for gupnp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454668 --- Comment #10 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com 2009-02-25 19:15:43 EDT --- I've updated the package with the latest version. SPEC: http://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/gupnp-vala.spec SRPM: http://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/gupnp-vala-0.5.3-1.fc10.src.rpm As this package is language bindings for a language that generates C code for compiling I don't believe the rpmlint output is really valid. The files included are all for development not running of apps. $ rpmlint /home/perobinson/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/gupnp-vala-0.5.3-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm gupnp-vala.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/pkgconfig/gupnp-vala-1.0.pc gupnp-vala.x86_64: E: no-binary 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486044] Review Request: php-pear-Config -Configuration file manipulation for PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486044
--- Comment #2 from Bernard Johnson bjohn...@symetrix.com 2009-02-25
19:23:38 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
First Notes :
- As optional deps are available it should be usefull to add it
Requires: php-pear(XML_Parser) php-pear(XML_Util)
added
- I prefer the use of %{name}.xml rather than %{pear_name}.xml (see recent
change to PHP Guidelines, this will avoid conflict with package from other
channel)
I did not find anything in the PHP guidelines, but I think I understand your
intention. Please check and see if my updates to the package achieve this.
- A comment about running test-suite will be usefull
14 PASSED TESTS
0 SKIPPED TESTS
2 FAILED TESTS:
Have you encounter and investigate this issue ? (at least, reported upstream)
Two of the tests are badly written and fail. There is no problem with the
functionality of the package.
- %file must be fixed, should be
%{pear_phpdir}/Config*
fixed
Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~bjohnson/php-pear-Config.spec
SRPM URL:
http://fedorapeople.org/~bjohnson/php-pear-Config-1.10.11-2.fc10.src.rpm
* Wed Feb 25 2009 Bernard Johnson bjohn...@symetrix.com - 1.10.11-2
- add dependencies for php-pear(XML_Parser) and php-pear(XML_Util)
- change from %%{pear_name}.xml to %%{name}.xml to avoid channel conflicts
- changes %%files section from %%{pear_phpdir}/* to %%{pear_phpdir}/Config*
- note regarding test suite failures added
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC 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 486557, which changed state. Bug 486557 Summary: please update to 0.70 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486557 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
