[Bug 510584] Review Request: openssl-ibmca - A dynamic OpenSSL engine for IBMCA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510584 Dan Horák d...@danny.cz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #7 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2009-07-14 01:59:02 EDT --- 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 511191] Review Request: yokadi - Command line oriented todo list 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=511191 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||511155 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511155] Review Request: python-dateutil - Extensions to the standard python datetime module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511155 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||511191 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511191] New: Review Request: yokadi - Command line oriented todo list system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: yokadi - Command line oriented todo list system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511191 Summary: Review Request: yokadi - Command line oriented todo list system Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/yokadi.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/yokadi-0.10.0-1.fc11.src.rpm Project URL: http://yokadi.github.com/ Description: Yokadi is a command-line oriented, SQLite powered, TODO list tool. It helps you organize all the things you have to do and you must not forget.It aims to be simple, intuitive and very efficient. In Yokadi you manage projects, which contains tasks. At the minimum, a task has a title, but it can also have a description, a due date, an urgency or keywords. Keywords can be any word that help you to find and sort your tasks. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1472548 rpmlint output: [...@laptop09 SRPMS]$ rpmlint yokadi-0.10.0-1.fc11.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [...@laptop09 noarch]$ rpmlint yokadi-0.10.0-1.fc11.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 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 486680] Review Request: chisholm-banana-peels-fonts - A Decorative Serif Font
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486680 Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sanjay.an...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 02:46:21 EDT --- hi, I see the bug has been inactive for quite sometime. I'd like to take over the font package. Joseph, if you do not wish to continue with this review,can you please close this bug so I can start a fresh one. regards, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511196] New: Review Request: ibus-table-array30 - Array30 Chinese input method for ibus-table
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: ibus-table-array30 - Array30 Chinese input method for ibus-table https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511196 Summary: Review Request: ibus-table-array30 - Array30 Chinese input method for ibus-table Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: dc...@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://dchen.fedorapeople.org/files/rpms/ibus-table-array30.spec SRPM URL: http://dchen.fedorapeople.org/files/rpms/ibus-table-array30-1.2.0.20090714-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: The Array 30 Chinese input method for ibus-table. It covers more than 70 thousands Chinese characters, which are listed in unicode 3.1. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511196] Review Request: ibus-table-array30 - Array30 Chinese input method for ibus-table
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511196 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511191] Review Request: yokadi - Command line oriented todo list 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=511191 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511155] Review Request: python-dateutil - Extensions to the standard python datetime module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511155 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453422] Review Request: songbird - Mozilla based multimedia player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453422 --- Comment #77 from Jakub Hrozek jhro...@redhat.com 2009-07-14 04:15:49 EDT --- FWIW, while the package Nicolas built installs fine, it segfaults immediately after you start playing just about any song (this is on x86_64 F11). I experienced the very same behaviour with upstream 1.2.0, so I don't suspect any packaging issue. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511167] Review Request: php-geoip - Map IP address to geographic places
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511167 Andrew Colin Kissa and...@topdog.za.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||and...@topdog.za.net --- Comment #4 from Andrew Colin Kissa and...@topdog.za.net 2009-07-14 04:15:18 EDT --- I have pushed it to stable now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511204] New: Review Request: wicd - A wireless and wired network manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: wicd - A wireless and wired network manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511204 Summary: Review Request: wicd - A wireless and wired network manager Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: sherry...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://sherry151.fedorapeople.org/wicd.spec SRPM URL: http://sherry151.fedorapeople.org/wicd-1.6.2-3.fc10.src.rpm Description: Complete network connection manager Wicd supports wired and wireless networks, and capable of creating and tracking profiles for both. It has a template-based wireless encryption system, which allows the user to easily add encryption methods used. It ships with some common encryption types, such as WPA and WEP. Wicd will automatically connect at startup to any preferred network within range. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497756] Review Request: lpg - LALR Parser Generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497756 Mat Booth fed...@matbooth.co.uk changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #25 from Mat Booth fed...@matbooth.co.uk 2009-07-14 04:32:55 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: lpg Short Description: LALR Parser Generator Owners: mbooth Branches: F-11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 508352] Review Request: pxe-kexec - kexec boot from a PXE server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508352 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jussi.leht...@iki.fi -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 508352] Review Request: pxe-kexec - kexec boot from a PXE server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508352 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED 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 511191] Review Request: yokadi - Command line oriented todo list 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=511191 Bug 511191 depends on bug 511155, which changed state. Bug 511155 Summary: Review Request: python-dateutil - Extensions to the standard python datetime module https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511155 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution||NOTABUG Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511191] Review Request: yokadi - Command line oriented todo list 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=511191 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 04:42:01 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i586). koji Build = http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1472743 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url 80cd6f335d7149cb2ab552fcc16ce63a4f12e63d yokadi-0.10.0.tar.bz2 + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Not a GUI application Should: 1) make sure you follow new change in BR for python packages https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#BuildRequires 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 508352] Review Request: pxe-kexec - kexec boot from a PXE server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508352 --- Comment #4 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 04:38:23 EDT --- Ed: I can sponsor you if you show me that you know the Fedora guidelines (most importantly the Packaging Guidelines and the Review Guidelines). This you can do by submitting another package for review, and performing a couple of informal reviews of packages of other people. Please perform informal reviews only of package not tagged with the FE-NEEDSPONSOR blocker bug, as I will have to perform formal reviews of these packages after you. I will perform the formal review on this package after Julian has done the informal one. After you have been sponsored you will be able to perform formal reviews of packages of other people. We have a long review queue at the moment and we need reviewers! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511155] Review Request: python-dateutil - Extensions to the standard python datetime module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511155 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG AssignedTo|panem...@gmail.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org Flag|fedora-review? | --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 04:41:46 EDT --- hmm while reviewing this package I found this is already in Fedora repo. This looks coming from Fedora core releases. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491694] Review Request: Anyterm - Web based terminal emulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491694
--- Comment #24 from Alexander Boström a...@root.snowtree.se 2009-07-14
04:51:52 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #23)
(In reply to comment #22)
* MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and
meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
Is this a separate issue or does this relate to the next one? The current spec
file includes License: GPLv2+ which should satisfy this requirement.
Yeah, I think that bullet refers to the package as a whole. GPLv2+ is fine,
course! Also, the build reqs. have GPL compatible licenses.
in there (only in trunk) this is not an issue:
http://svn.anyterm.org/anyterm/tags/releases/1.1/1.1.29/src/
Eh, sorry, rather sloppy of me to not check that. I'm glad it's not really an
issue, though.
(just out of curiosity if it was an issue, what would I need to do, eg would
this something we couldn't proceed with until it was resolved upstream?
In the general case I think upstream needs to have its licensing in order for
their code to go into Fedora.
But in this case, looking further at the code, I see that worst case we'd just
need a new tarball with the file removed, because it seems it's actually only
used on Solaris.
nothing in anyterm explicitly depends on httpd
and it can be run 100% fine as is without it.
(what are your thoughts about a seperate anyterm-httpd package?)
Hmm, you're right. A subpackage would be fine. Another option is to just put
anyterm.conf in %doc since it asks to be edited anyway.
I tried to use all the predefined %{} macros that I could where
appropriate
There's __make, __rm, __mkdir.
I'm not sure how to approach doing these translations / which are needed
Me neither, but I just mentioned it for completeness. Not a blocker!
Which way is standard? Googling for this, I find most specs redirect both
stdout / stderr
(or even just stderr)
I'd say only redirect stderr if there's a known, harmless error to hide. If
it's normally silent on stderr then don't redirect it. The same goes for
stdout, only redirect it if there's anything unsightly to hide.
getent might send uninteresting output to stdout but is always silent on stderr
even when the entry is missing. useradd/groupadd is always silent on both
stdout and stderr. So only redirect stdout from getent and don't redirect
anything from useradd/groupadd.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UsersAndGroups does it that 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 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969
--- Comment #15 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 04:57:56
EDT ---
A few comments:
- You still need to fill in your whole name in Bugzilla.
- I get the following output from rpmlint:
valide.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib64/valide/plugins/file-browser/libfile-browser.so
valide.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib64/valide/plugins/opened-documents/libopened-documents.so
valide.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/libvalide-0.0.so.0.5.1
valide.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib64/valide/plugins/symbol/libsymbol.so
valide.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib64/valide/plugins/completion/libcompletion.so
valide.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib64/valide/plugins/todo/libtodo.so
valide.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/valide/licenses/None
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings.
Check that you have the package redhat-rpm-macros installed on your system
and add
find %{buildroot}%{_libdir} -name *.so -exec chmod 755 {} \;
to the end of install to give the .so files executable permissions so that
rpmbuild picks them up and strips them.
- Drop the explicit requires. rpm automatically picks up the requires on all of
them. As an IDE this probably should Require: vala-devel though. The intltool
requirement is OK.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Explicit_Requires
- The remove command should most likely be in %preun, since in the %postun
phase the package has already been removed and %{_bindir}/%{name} doesn't exist
anymore. Also, you should probably add some logic so that the commands aren't
run when the package is upgraded.
- The %{_bindir}/%{name} --add doesn't work. Upon installation of the RPM I
get
Preparing...### [100%]
1:valide ### [100%]
(valide:21124): Gtk-WARNING **: cannot open display:
warning: %post(valide-0.5.1-278svn.0.3.fc11.x86_64) scriptlet failed, exit
status 1
- For consistency use
%{_bindir}/valide
in the files section instead of
%{_bindir}/%{name}.
- Unowned directories issues. Change
%dir %{_libdir}/%{name}
%{_libdir}/%{name}/plugins/*
%{_datadir}/pixmaps/valide/*
%{_datadir}/vala/vapi/*
%{_datadir}/valide/*
to
%{_libdir}/%{name}/
%{_datadir}/pixmaps/valide/
%{_datadir}/vala/vapi/*
%{_datadir}/valide/
in the main package and
%{_includedir}/valide-0.5/*
to
%{_includedir}/valide-0.5/
in the -devel package.
- You are placing icons in %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/ so you must Require:
hicolor-icon-theme. You must refresh the icon cache as instructed in
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache
- Package doesn't build in mock due to missing BR desktop-file-utils.
- Add
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
to the -devel package. You don't have to duplicate the requires of the main
package in the -devel package when there is a dependency chain.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package
- You are mixing macros, which is forbidden.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Using_.25.7Bbuildroot.7D_and_.25.7Boptflags.7D_vs_.24RPM_BUILD_ROOT_and_.24RPM_OPT_FLAGS
- Change all references to ./waf to ./waf -v to get debugging output.
- Change
./waf configure --prefix=%{_prefix} --with-libdir=%{_libdir}
to
CFLAGS=%{optflags} LINKFLAGS=%{optflags} ./waf -v configure
--prefix=%{_prefix} --with-libdir=%{_libdir}
in order to get the Fedora optimization flags into use.
- For consistency, change
%defattr(-, root, root)
to
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
in the -devel package.
- ldconfig is part of glibc, so I'd drop the
Requires(post): /sbin/ldconfig
Requires(postun): /sbin/ldconfig
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511212] Review Request: Cluster glue - reusable clustering components
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511212 Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 507943] Review Request: moblin-gtk-engine - GTK engine for Moblin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507943 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 05:00:32 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. NEEDSWORK - Time stamps are lost during install. Adding INSTALL=install -p as argument to make install should do the trick. I couldn't find anything about this in packaging guidelines. It's sort of implicitly assumed in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Timestamps I sent a request to add the mention of it to the FPC. OK, I'll update it when its in the packaging guidelines. I don't see that it should block the review as I only see it there when copying files within the install section. The only one that does that is the utf-8 stuff which preserves it as per the details you provided above. The purpose is to have the same time stamps on files that are not architecture specific in order to avoid trouble with multilib/multiarch packages. Adding the INSTALL=install -p doesn't harm anything. I guess I can't flunk this review on that grounds, so the package is APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511212] New: Review Request: Cluster glue - reusable clustering components
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: Cluster glue - reusable clustering components https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511212 Summary: Review Request: Cluster glue - reusable clustering components Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: and...@beekhof.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://oss.clusterlabs.org/~beekhof/fedora/cluster-glue.spec SRPM URL: http://oss.clusterlabs.org/~beekhof/fedora/cluster-glue-0.9-2.fc12.src.rpm Description: Reusable cluster components - part of the new cluster stack A collection of common tools that are useful for writing cluster managers such as Pacemaker. Provides a local resource manager that understands the OCF and LSB standards, and an interface to common STONITH devices. Background: I've recently been hired by RedHat in order to work on Pacemaker (which requires this new package). We'd like to include it in F12 so that we can offer it as a tech preview in RHEL6. This package is built from the pre-release snapshots that will become 1.0.0. Submission of the Pacemaker package will follow shortly. Please note, this is my first package so I am looking for a sponsor. rpmlint output: [1] cluster-glue.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/heartbeat/cores/nobody 0700 A standard directory should have permission set to 0755. If you get this message, it means that you have wrong directory permissions in some dirs included in your package. [2] cluster-glue.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/heartbeat/cores/root 0700 A standard directory should have permission set to 0755. If you get this message, it means that you have wrong directory permissions in some dirs included in your package. [3] cluster-glue.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/heartbeat/cores/daemon 0700 A standard directory should have permission set to 0755. If you get this message, it means that you have wrong directory permissions in some dirs included in your package. [4] libcluster-glue1.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. [5] libcluster-glue-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on libcluster-glue/libcluster-glue-libs/liblibcluster-glue [6] libcluster-glue-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. 5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 3 warnings. Items 1-3 appear to be an rpmlint bug, the directories exist to record core files. The choice of 0700 was intentional and is intended to restrict access to the core file contents to the users after which the directories are named. I believe items 4 and 6 are erroneous as the relevant files are included in the cluster-glue package. I believe item 5 is a bug in rpmlint as the subpackage is libcluster-glue1 and the -devel package does indeed have a dependancy 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 511196] Review Request: ibus-table-array30 - Array30 Chinese input method for ibus-table
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511196
--- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 05:07:37
EDT ---
Review:
+ package builds in mock (rawhide i586).
koji Build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1472650
+ rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM.
+ source files match upstream url
3d1d3e9bc8e24cfea7af24c30fca8ca940449b46
ibus-table-array30-1.2.0.20090714-Source.tar.gz
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written
+ Spec file is written in American English.
+ Spec file is legible.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
+ license is open source-compatible.
+ License text is included in package.
+ %doc is present.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installed properly.
+ Macro use appears rather consistent.
+ Package contains code, not content.
+ no headers or static libraries.
+ no .pc file present.
+ no -devel subpackage
+ no .la files.
+ no translations are available
+ Does owns the directories it creates.
+ ibus-table-createdb (post) scriptlets present.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ Not a GUI application
Should:
1) you should use make install as
make DESTDIR=%{buildroot} INSTALL=install -p install
2) License is not clear to me. table text file says its LGPL license.
3) Other ibus-table-* packages are not using cin2ibus.c. Any reason for using
this for this package?
4) also saw other ibus-table-* packages using
export IBUS_TABLE_CREATEDB=%{_bindir}/ibus-table-createdb -o
in %build.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511094] Review Request: perl-TAP-Formatter-HTML - TAP Test Harness output delegate for html output
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511094 Daniel Berrange berra...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Daniel Berrange berra...@redhat.com 2009-07-14 05:17:47 EDT --- Thanks for such a prompt review ! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-TAP-Formatter-HTML Short Description: TAP Test Harness output delegate for html output Owners: berrange Branches: F-11 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 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969
--- Comment #16 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 05:21:02
EDT ---
The release tag is incorrect: instead of
%{svn_revision}.0.3%{?dist}
it should be
0.3.%{svn_revision}%{?dist}
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_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 507943] Review Request: moblin-gtk-engine - GTK engine for Moblin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507943 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 05:19:47 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: moblin-gtk-engine Short Description: GTK engine for Moblin Owners: pbrobinson Branches: F-11 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 507943] Review Request: moblin-gtk-engine - GTK engine for Moblin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507943 --- Comment #9 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 05:18:51 EDT --- OK, I'll update it when its in the packaging guidelines. I don't see that it should block the review as I only see it there when copying files within the install section. The only one that does that is the utf-8 stuff which preserves it as per the details you provided above. The purpose is to have the same time stamps on files that are not architecture specific in order to avoid trouble with multilib/multiarch packages. Adding the INSTALL=install -p doesn't harm anything. I guess I can't flunk this review on that grounds, so the package is Thanks. That makes sense (and is good to know) for noarch packages. I'll add it to my notes :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 507943] Review Request: moblin-gtk-engine - GTK engine for Moblin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507943 --- Comment #11 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 05:29:51 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) OK, I'll update it when its in the packaging guidelines. I don't see that it should block the review as I only see it there when copying files within the install section. The only one that does that is the utf-8 stuff which preserves it as per the details you provided above. The purpose is to have the same time stamps on files that are not architecture specific in order to avoid trouble with multilib/multiarch packages. Adding the INSTALL=install -p doesn't harm anything. I guess I can't flunk this review on that grounds, so the package is Thanks. That makes sense (and is good to know) for noarch packages. I'll add it to my notes :-) Not really, more for -devel packages that exist e.g. on both i386 and x86_64 and the two can be installed in the same time. (They contain both architecture independent headers and architecture dependent libraries.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511081] Review Request: perl-accessors - Create accessor methods in caller's package
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511081 Daniel Berrange berra...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #4 from Daniel Berrange berra...@redhat.com 2009-07-14 05:42:29 EDT --- Built into rawhide as perl-accessors-1.01-1.fc12 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511094] Review Request: perl-TAP-Formatter-HTML - TAP Test Harness output delegate for html output
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511094 Bug 511094 depends on bug 511081, which changed state. Bug 511081 Summary: Review Request: perl-accessors - Create accessor methods in caller's package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511081 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 506238] Review Request: php-pecl-geoip - Extension to map IP addresses to geographic places
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=506238 Andrew Colin Kissa and...@topdog.za.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Andrew Colin Kissa and...@topdog.za.net 2009-07-14 05:40:13 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: php-pecl-geoip New Branches: EL-5 Owners: topdog -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511081] Review Request: perl-accessors - Create accessor methods in caller's package
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511081 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-07-14 05:56:19 EDT --- perl-accessors-1.01-1.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-accessors-1.01-1.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452427] Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome floating and tiling window manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452427 Bug 452427 depends on bug 499579, which changed state. Bug 499579 Summary: Review Request: libxdg-basedir - Implementation of the XDG Base Directory Specifications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499579 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution||ERRATA Bug 452427 depends on bug 499517, which changed state. Bug 499517 Summary: update startup-notification-0.10 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499517 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|NEW |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510698] Review Request: klavaro - Typing tutor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510698 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 05:59:49 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i586). koji Build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1472652 - rpmlint is NOT silent for RPM. klavaro.i586: E: setgid-binary /usr/bin/klavaro_helper root 02755 The file is setgid. Usually this is a packaging bug. If this is a game, then, you should use the proper rpm group, or location. klavaro.i586: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/klavaro_helper 02755 A standard executable should have permission set to 0755. If you get this message, it means that you have a wrong executable permissions in some files included in your package. + source files match upstream url b69ab99f94525902ca8d1f12fb46c041ad9cb5ba klavaro-1.2.1.tar.bz2 + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + gtk-update-icon-cache scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Desktop file installed correctly. + GUI application Should: 1) Correct license tag to GPLv3+ 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 511219] New: Review Request: conakry-fonts - N'Ko font by well-known Unicode.org expert font designer Michael Everson
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: conakry-fonts - N'Ko font by well-known Unicode.org expert font designer Michael Everson https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511219 Summary: Review Request: conakry-fonts - N'Ko font by well-known Unicode.org expert font designer Michael Everson Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: sanjay.an...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/conakry-fonts/conakry-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/conakry-fonts/conakry-fonts-20070829-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: N'Ko font by well-known Unicode.org expert font designer Michael Everson -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452427] Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome floating and tiling window manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452427 Christian Krause c...@plauener.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|c...@plauener.de Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452427] Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome floating and tiling window manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452427 --- Comment #58 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-07-14 06:34:37 EDT --- Christian: I am glad you expressed intention to review this but just wanna let you know that this is still being blocked by bug 465759 and not going to be fixed any time soon. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511219] Review Request: conakry-fonts - N'Ko font by well-known Unicode.org expert font designer Michael Everson
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511219 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484386] Review Request: gri - A language for scientific illustration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484386 --- Comment #14 from Dan Kelley kelley@gmail.com 2009-07-14 06:48:04 EDT --- Do I infer correctly, from the comments of D Haley, that declaring it GPLv2+ in a few spots can let me make the change without altering each and every source file? That would be wonderful, because altering the source files has a bit of a negative effect. (The modification date is a useful thing, in indicating at a glance which parts of a code have been reworked, and which worked from the start. I'm a scientist, and I trust 1960s fortran subroutines more than months-old c++.) I would love to get a clear statement on what I should do. I am hoping, from D Haley's comment, that I may satisfy Fedora's needs by modifying just a few files ... but which ones? (I have modified my gri.spec, but I don't know if that's being used by Fedora, actually.) PS. I know I'm being a nuisance on this, but I do think it is better for me to use my time on the code, rather than on reading documents about licenses. PPS. Gri is quit old, which explains why I say GPL in some places ... that's all there was, once upon a time! Dan -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457709] Review Request: perizia-fonts - English asymmetric font
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457709 Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sanjay.an...@gmail.com --- Comment #6 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 06:57:53 EDT --- hi, I'd like to take over the font package. Minto, if you do not wish to continue with this review, may I package the font and continue the review?? Or you can close this bug and a fresh one can be started. regards, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 503662] Review Request: saab-fonts - OTF Saab Punjabi Font
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503662 --- Comment #11 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 06:58:21 EDT --- Lohit Punjabi and Saab font are different fonts. What benefits will be after bumping conf file priority to 91? so new conf file will be ?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8? !DOCTYPE fontconfig SYSTEM ../fonts.dtd fontconfig alias familysans-serif/family prefer familySaab/family /prefer /alias alias familySaab/family default familyserif/family /default /alias /fontconfig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511219] Review Request: conakry-fonts - N'Ko font by well-known Unicode.org expert font designer Michael Everson
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511219
Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 07:00:41
EDT ---
+ koji build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1472912
+ rpmlint output is clean
+ source verified as
76b20dd143db24f5026e6b8b565dadf985b5200c ConakryFont.zip
Should:
1) look https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template
By adding %dir %{_fontdir}/ in spec you duplicated files installed.
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 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pin...@pingoured.fr --- Comment #17 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr 2009-07-14 07:08:56 EDT --- (In reply to comment #12) You have to fill your whole name in Bugzilla. Where do you get that have to from ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 503662] Review Request: saab-fonts - OTF Saab Punjabi Font
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503662 --- Comment #12 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 07:16:21 EDT --- Just discussed with nim-nim. Please use 66 as priority for fontconfig 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 511219] Review Request: conakry-fonts - N'Ko font by well-known Unicode.org expert font designer Michael Everson
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511219 --- Comment #2 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 07:16:07 EDT --- Just discussed with nim-nim. Please use 65 as priority for fontconfig 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 504641] Review Request: sendxmpp - A perl script to send xmpp messages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504641 Ruben Kerkhof ru...@rubenkerkhof.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #18 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 07:27:14 EDT --- (In reply to comment #17) (In reply to comment #12) You have to fill your whole name in Bugzilla. Where do you get that have to from ? It's not necessary for normal BZ users, but for packagers it's standard procedure since the bugzilla account is tightly coupled with the Fedora Account System. At least you can think of it as courtesy to other people. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #20 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr 2009-07-14 07:32:58 EDT --- I understand you point of view and accept it, but I can see Jonathan's name of the page here and on the spec :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #19 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 07:28:13 EDT --- (In reply to comment #18) At least you can think of it as courtesy to other people. .. and I refuse to review any packages submitted/written by anonymous people. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #21 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 07:34:58 EDT --- (In reply to comment #20) I understand you point of view and accept it, but I can see Jonathan's name of the page here and on the spec :) It was already in the spec but he must have changed the name in bugzilla now... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453422] Review Request: songbird - Mozilla based multimedia player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453422 --- Comment #78 from David Halik auralva...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 07:35:31 EDT --- I've been testing the last couple of release on x86_64 F11 and have not seen this problem. If you're also having the segfault from the upstream binaries, it sounds like an issue with the gstreamer installation. If the plugin compliment isn't correct the program does get cranky, although it shouldn't crash, so I suggest opening a bug upstream. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510698] Review Request: klavaro - Typing tutor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510698 --- Comment #5 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-07-14 07:36:28 EDT --- Thanks for the review, Parag. I will fix the license before the cvs import. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511191] Review Request: yokadi - Command line oriented todo list 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=511191 --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-07-14 07:39:06 EDT --- Thanks for the review and the hint about the BR. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510698] Review Request: klavaro - Typing tutor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510698 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-07-14 07:37:25 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: klavaro Short Description: Typing tutor Owners: fab Branches: F-10 F-11 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511219] Review Request: conakry-fonts - N'Ko font by well-known Unicode.org expert font designer Michael Everson
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511219 --- Comment #3 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 07:38:31 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) Just discussed with nim-nim. Please use 65 as priority for fontconfig file. made the corrections : http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/conakry-fonts/conakry-fonts.spec http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/conakry-fonts/conakry-fonts-20070829-2.fc10.src.rpm other results from the mock build at : http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/conakry-fonts/ Continuing from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle#3.a regards, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511191] Review Request: yokadi - Command line oriented todo list 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=511191 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-07-14 07:42:20 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: yokadi Short Description: Command line oriented todo list system Owners: fab Branches: F-10 F-11 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511219] Review Request: conakry-fonts - N'Ko font by well-known Unicode.org expert font designer Michael Everson
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511219 Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 07:40:45 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: conakry-fonts Short Description: N'Ko font by well-known Unicode.org expert font designer Michael Everson Owners: ankursinha Branches: F-10 F-11 InitialCC: fonts-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 511155] Review Request: python-dateutil - Extensions to the standard python datetime module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511155 --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-07-14 07:41:29 EDT --- Yes, this package is already in Fedora. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #22 from MERCIER Jonathan bioinfornat...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 07:42:58 EDT --- This morining i have add in preference account my firts name but the last name exist since a long time -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #23 from MERCIER Jonathan bioinfornat...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 07:43:16 EDT --- This morning i have add in preference account my first name but the last name exist since a long time -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #24 from MERCIER Jonathan bioinfornat...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 07:50:07 EDT --- Spec file: http://bioinformatiques.free.fr/SPECS/valide.spec SRC.RPM file: http://bioinformatiques.free.fr/SRPMS/valide-0.5.1-278svn.0.3.fc11.src.rpm $ rpmlint -i rpmbuild/SRPMS/valide-0.5.1-0.4.278svn.fc11.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint -i rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/valide-* valide.x86_64: E: devel-dependency vala-devel Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package itself. valide.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/valide/licenses/None 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 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 508352] Review Request: pxe-kexec - kexec boot from a PXE server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508352
--- Comment #5 from Julian Aloofi jul...@fedoraproject.org 2009-07-14
07:55:02 EDT ---
Here comes the informal review:
rpmlint output of all files is clean:
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
MUST: The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a
duplicate. OK
MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used
consistently. NEEDSWORK
- You could leave some space inbetween the spec file sections
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines. OK
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
OK
MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc. OK
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. OK
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. N/A
MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. NEEDSWORK
- Time stamps are not preserved, add INSTALL=install -p to make install in
the %install section
MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. N/A
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package
that owns the directory. OK
MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK
MUST: Debuginfo package is complete. OK
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK
MUST: Clean section exists. OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. N/A
MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect
runtime of application. OK
MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. N/A
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A
MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. N/A
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files
ending in .so must go in a -devel package. N/A
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency. N/A
MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. N/A
MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. N/A
MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK
MUST: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK
SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK
SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from
upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. N/A
SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 508352] Review Request: pxe-kexec - kexec boot from a PXE server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508352 --- Comment #6 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 08:05:26 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) Here comes the informal review: rpmlint output of all files is clean: 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. MUST: The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a duplicate. OK MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used consistently. NEEDSWORK - You could leave some space inbetween the spec file sections Oh, there's no need for that - the spacing is ideal: the sections are clearly visible and the spec file is compact. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510097] Review Request: python-urwid - console user interface for python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510097 Rangeen Basu Roy Chowdhury sherry...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||511204 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511204] Review Request: wicd - A wireless and wired network manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511204 Rangeen Basu Roy Chowdhury sherry...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||510097 --- Comment #1 from Rangeen Basu Roy Chowdhury sherry...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 08:10:22 EDT --- Modified spec file urlhttp://sherry151.fedorapeople.org/wicd/wicd.spec Modified srpm url:http://sherry151.fedorapeople.org/wicd/wicd-1.6.2-3.fc10.src.rpm I wanted to preserve the original files and so changed the urls to point to new files Successful koji scratch builds: F-10: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1472887 F-11: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1472992 F-12: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1472994 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 508352] Review Request: pxe-kexec - kexec boot from a PXE server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508352 --- Comment #7 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 08:14:32 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. NEEDSWORK - Time stamps are not preserved, add INSTALL=install -p to make install in the %install section This project doesn't use autotools, so this doesn't work. Also there are no files that need time stamps to be preserved: the binary is created during compilation and so is the man page. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 508352] Review Request: pxe-kexec - kexec boot from a PXE server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508352 --- Comment #8 from Julian Aloofi jul...@fedoraproject.org 2009-07-14 08:19:44 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) This project doesn't use autotools, so this doesn't work. Also there are no files that need time stamps to be preserved: the binary is created during compilation and so is the man page. Oops. No problems then I'd say. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #25 from MERCIER Jonathan bioinfornat...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 08:21:01 EDT --- E: zero-length /usr/share/valide/licenses/None -- Comment #14 |---For the last warning, the upstream say is normal intentionally empty file E: devel-dependency vala-devel Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package--- As an IDE this probably should Require: vala-devel though. The intltool requirement is OK. Comment # 15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 508352] Review Request: pxe-kexec - kexec boot from a PXE server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508352
--- Comment #9 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 08:22:34
EDT ---
rpmlint output is clean.
MUST: The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a
duplicate. OK
MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used
consistently. OK
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines. OK
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
OK
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. NEEDSWORK
- Source file does not match upstream:
b844e96b9416602e565377f18a2dc26f pxe-kexec-0.1.7.tar.bz2
3aa6f95a31a3e7eadc363dec9d8321d7 ../SOURCES/pxe-kexec-0.1.7.tar.bz2
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. N/A
MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. OK
MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. N/A
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package
that owns the directory. OK
MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK
- I recommend using
%{_sbindir}/pxe-kexec
%{_mandir}/man8/pxe-kexec.8.*
instead of
%{_sbindir}/*
%{_mandir}/man*/*
as the former is clearer.
MUST: Debuginfo package is complete. OK
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK
MUST: Clean section exists. OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. N/A
MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect
runtime of application. NEEDSWORK
- Drop INSTALL, it doesn't contain any useful information.
MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. N/A
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A
MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. N/A
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files
ending in .so must go in a -devel package. N/A
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency. N/A
MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. N/A
MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. N/A
MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK
MUST: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK
SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK
SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from
upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. OK
SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 449840] Review Request: trac-spamfilter-plugin - Spam-Filter plugin for Trac
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449840 Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||p...@city-fan.org --- Comment #6 from Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org 2009-07-14 08:29:03 EDT --- I think this bug can be closed now. By the way, would you like a co-maintainer? I just rolled myself a package based on svn revision 8330, which fixes 5 upstream bugs (#6130, #7627, #8032, #8121, #8257 - http://trac.edgewall.org/ticket/8257 seems particularly relevant) and is worth updating to IMHO. I'd be happy to make the update in Fedora too. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 505982] Review Request: zikula-module-MultiHook - MultiHook is a simple replacement for the old AutoLinks module for Zikula
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505982 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-07-14 08:29:45 EDT --- zikula-module-MultiHook-5.0-4.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/zikula-module-MultiHook-5.0-4.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 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969
--- Comment #26 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 08:30:20
EDT ---
- You didn't increment the release tag. Please increment the release tag
whenever making changes to the spec file. (Except when the version tag is
incremented the release tag falls back to 1.)
- Drop
Requires: vala = %{vala_version}
and put the version requirement in the Requires: vala-devel. (dependency on
vala is automatically picked up, also vala-devel pulls it in.)
- Devel package doesn't have to
Requires: vala-devel = %{vala_version}
since this requirement is already in the main package. Drop it.
- The BuildRequires line is unnecessarily long. Please divide it in at least
two separate lines.
- You should add comments to the %post and %postun sections. Now it's a bit
unclear to the reader what is the purpose of the commands.
- For clarity of the spec file you could remove some of the empty lines within
the sections, %build, %install, %post and %postun are a bit too sparse compared
to their environment.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511212] Review Request: Cluster glue - reusable clustering components
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511212 Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||511246 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511246] Review Request: Pacemaker - cman/rgmanager replacement
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511246 Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||511212 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 505982] Review Request: zikula-module-MultiHook - MultiHook is a simple replacement for the old AutoLinks module for Zikula
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505982 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-07-14 08:37:09 EDT --- zikula-module-MultiHook-5.0-4.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/zikula-module-MultiHook-5.0-4.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511245] New: Review Request: mythes-hu - Hungarian thesaurus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: mythes-hu - Hungarian thesaurus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511245 Summary: Review Request: mythes-hu - Hungarian thesaurus Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: caol...@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.redhat.com/caolanm/rpms/mythes-hu.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/caolanm/rpms/mythes-hu-0.20090203-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Hungarian thesaurus -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511246] New: Review Request: Pacemaker - cman/rgmanager replacement
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: Pacemaker - cman/rgmanager replacement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511246
Summary: Review Request: Pacemaker - cman/rgmanager replacement
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: low
Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: and...@beekhof.net
QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://oss.clusterlabs.org/~beekhof/fedora/pacemaker.spec
SRPM URL:
http://oss.clusterlabs.org/~beekhof/fedora/pacemaker-1.0.4-1.fc11.src.rpm
Description: Advanced High Availability cluster manager.
Pacemaker is an advanced, scalable High-Availability cluster resource
manager for Linux-HA (Heartbeat) and/or OpenAIS.
It supports n-node clusters with significant capabilities for
managing resources and dependencies.
It will run scripts at initialization, when machines go up or down,
when related resources fail and can be configured to periodically check
resource health.
Background: I've recently been hired by RedHat in order to work on Pacemaker.
We'd like to include it in F12 so that we can offer it as a tech preview in
RHEL6.
This package requires cluster-glue and the current version of corosync from the
upstream SVN in order to build.
Please note, along with cluster-glue, this is my first package so I am looking
for a sponsor.
I. rpmlint output:
[beek...@f11 pacemaker]$ rpmlint x86_64/* pacemaker.spec
pacemaker-1.0.4-1.fc11.src.rpm
libpacemaker3.x86_64: W: no-documentation
libpacemaker3.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libcib.so.1.0.1
e...@glibc_2.2.5
libpacemaker3.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit
/usr/lib64/libcrmcluster.so.1.0.0 e...@glibc_2.2.5
libpacemaker3.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libpengine.so.3.0.0
e...@glibc_2.2.5
libpacemaker-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on
libpacemaker/libpacemaker-libs/liblibpacemaker
libpacemaker-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
pacemaker.spec:191: E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/ocf
pacemaker.spec:192: E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/ocf/resource.d
pacemaker.spec:193: E: hardcoded-library-path in
/usr/lib/ocf/resource.d/pacemaker
pacemaker.src:191: E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/ocf
pacemaker.src:192: E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/ocf/resource.d
pacemaker.src:193: E: hardcoded-library-path in
/usr/lib/ocf/resource.d/pacemaker
pacemaker.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/heartbeat/crm 0750
pacemaker.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/pengine 0750
pacemaker.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/run/crm 0750
pacemaker.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/pacemaker/constraints-1.0.rng
pacemaker.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/pacemaker/crm.dtd
pacemaker.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/pacemaker/crm-transitional.dtd
pacemaker.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/pacemaker/nvset-1.0.rng
pacemaker.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/pacemaker/pacemaker-1.0.rng
pacemaker.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/pacemaker/pacemaker.rng
pacemaker.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/pacemaker/resources-1.0.rng
pacemaker.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/pacemaker/rule-1.0.rng
pacemaker.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/pacemaker/score.rng
pacemaker.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/pacemaker/upgrade06.xsl
pacemaker.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter
/usr/share/pacemaker/cts/CTSlab.py env
pacemaker.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter
/usr/share/pacemaker/cts/extracttests.py env
pacemaker.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter
/usr/share/pacemaker/cts/OCFIPraTest.py env
5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 22 errors, 6 warnings.
II. Errors
a. There are many script-without-shebang errors which appears to be an rpmlint
bug.
These files are XML related, not scripts, and should not include a shebang.
b. There are three instances of wrong-script-interpreter, which I also believe
to be an rpmlint problem.
The use of 'env' redirection allows us to execute with the version of python
preferred by the user.
c. The instances of non-standard-dir-perm would also appear to be incorrect, it
is not intended that users other than daemon should be allowed to write to
these locations.
d. The most controversial errors are probably the hardcoded-library-path ones,
which I also believe to be a bug in rpmlint.
Rpmlint expects %{_libdir}, which is generally the right thing to do. However,
the OCF RA API specifies the use of /usr/lib/ocf:
[Bug 511246] Review Request: Pacemaker - cman/rgmanager replacement
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511246 Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 505982] Review Request: zikula-module-MultiHook - MultiHook is a simple replacement for the old AutoLinks module for Zikula
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505982 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-07-14 08:43:40 EDT --- zikula-module-MultiHook-5.0-4.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/zikula-module-MultiHook-5.0-4.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #27 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 08:44:12 EDT --- (In reply to comment #26) - You didn't increment the release tag. Please increment the release tag whenever making changes to the spec file. (Except when the version tag is incremented the release tag falls back to 1.) Oh, that was just in the link you posted. No problem. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 511245] Review Request: mythes-hu - Hungarian thesaurus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511245 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #28 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 08:49:47 EDT --- (In reply to comment #24) $ rpmlint -i rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/valide-* valide.x86_64: E: devel-dependency vala-devel Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package itself. Yes, this is fine. valide.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/valide/licenses/None This can be ignored if it's supposed to be empty by design. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #29 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 08:51:50 EDT --- Your Requires: lines are messed up. $ rpm -qpR valide-0.5.1-0.4.278svn.fc11.x86_64.rpm /bin/sh /bin/sh 0.7.3 hicolor-icon-theme libatk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.7)(64bit) libcairo.so.2()(64bit) libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit) libfreetype.so.6()(64bit) libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgmodule-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgthread-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgtksourceview-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libpango-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangocairo-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangoft2-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) librt.so.1()(64bit) libsqlite3.so.0()(64bit) libunique-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libvala.so.0()(64bit) libvalide-0.0.so.0()(64bit) libxml2.so.2()(64bit) rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 rtld(GNU_HASH) vala = = vala-devel $ rpm -qpR valide-devel-0.5.1-0.4.278svn.fc11.x86_64.rpm 0.7.3 2.7.3 intltool libvalide-0.0.so.0()(64bit) libxml2-devel = = rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 vala-devel = = valide = 0.5.1-0.4.278svn.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 507916] Review Request: javanotes - Introduction to Programming Using Java, By David J. Eck
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507916 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-07-14 08:58:30 EDT --- javanotes-5.1-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/javanotes-5.1-2.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502490] Review Request: rubygem-state_machine - Adds support for creating state machines for attributes on any Ruby class
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502490 Darryl L. Pierce dpie...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #12 from Darryl L. Pierce dpie...@redhat.com 2009-07-14 08:57:10 EDT --- Everything's good. Thanks, guys. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461793] Review Request: spu-gcc - Cross Compiling GNU GCC targeted at spu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461793 --- Comment #4 from Aidan Delaney a.j.dela...@brighton.ac.uk 2009-07-14 09:00:17 EDT --- Thanks. I'll upgrade the packages for Fedora 11 and do this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 507916] Review Request: javanotes - Introduction to Programming Using Java, By David J. Eck
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507916 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-07-14 09:04:22 EDT --- javanotes-5.1-2.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/javanotes-5.1-2.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #31 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 09:12:46 EDT --- $ sudo rpm -Uvh valide-0.5.1-0.5.278svn.fc11.x86_64.rpm Preparing...### [100%] 1:valide ### [100%] (valide:13042): Gtk-WARNING **: cannot open display: $ sudo rpm -e valide /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.9uSTWm: line 3: /usr/bin/valide: No such file or directory Comment #15 item 5. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457709] Review Request: perizia-fonts - English asymmetric font
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457709 Minto Joseph mvali...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(mvali...@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #7 from Minto Joseph mvali...@redhat.com 2009-07-14 09:16:53 EDT --- Hi Ankur, I had contacted the upstream personally and requested him to release the package as pointed by Nicolas. He had agreed to do that. Seems like he have not yet done that. Sorry for not updating the status in bugzilla. Feel free to take over the font package if you want to. Regards, Minto -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #32 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 09:17:38 EDT --- Where did you get the commands valide --add and valide --remove ? I get (after installation): $ valide --add Unknown option --add $ valide --remove Unknown option --remove Drop the invocations from 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 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #30 from MERCIER Jonathan bioinfornat...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 09:06:20 EDT --- ok fixed Spec file: http://bioinformatiques.free.fr/SPECS/valide.spec SRC.RPM file: http://bioinformatiques.free.fr/SRPMS/valide-0.5.1-0.5.278svn.fc11.src.rpm $ rpm -qpR rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/valide-0.5.1-0.5.278svn.fc11.x86_64.rpm /bin/sh /bin/sh hicolor-icon-theme libatk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.7)(64bit) libcairo.so.2()(64bit) libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit) libfreetype.so.6()(64bit) libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgmodule-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgthread-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgtksourceview-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libpango-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangocairo-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangoft2-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) librt.so.1()(64bit) libsqlite3.so.0()(64bit) libunique-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libvala.so.0()(64bit) libvalide-0.0.so.0()(64bit) libxml2.so.2()(64bit) rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 rtld(GNU_HASH) vala-devel = 0.7.3 rpm -qpR rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/valide-devel-0.5.1-0.5.278svn.fc11.x86_64.rpm intltool libvalide-0.0.so.0()(64bit) libxml2-devel = 2.7.3 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 valide = 0.5.1-0.5.278svn.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 508318] Review Request: mutter - A window manager based on metacity and clutter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508318 Bug 508318 depends on bug 469460, which changed state. Bug 469460 Summary: review request: gir-repository - GObject Introspection Repository https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469460 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469460] review request: gir-repository - GObject Introspection Repository
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469460 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #14 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 09:47:24 EDT --- Closing as its now in rawhide -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #33 from MERCIER Jonathan bioinfornat...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 09:47:01 EDT --- yes sorry fixed Spec file: http://bioinformatiques.free.fr/SPECS/valide.spec SRC.RPM file: http://bioinformatiques.free.fr/SRPMS/valide-0.5.1-0.6.278svn.fc11.src.rpm $ su -c 'rpm -ivh rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/valide-0.5.1-0.6.278svn.fc11.x86_64.rpm' Mot de passe : Préparation... ### [100%] 1:valide ### [100%] $ which valide /usr/bin/valide $ su -c 'rpm -e valide /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.xtJcWO: line 3: /usr/bin/valide: No such file or 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 226152] Merge Review: mod_auth_mysql
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226152
--- Comment #6 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-07-14 09:51:35
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Looks good other than:
-Requires: httpd-mmn = %(cat %{_includedir}/httpd/.mmn || echo missing
httpd-devel)
+Requires: httpd-mmn
which is a regression - leave that line as-is.
I didn't get how is this regression and why we need that much long line in
Requires?
As I am reviewing this package, I cannot apply changes to this package even if
I don't need co-ownership for this package as I am in provenpackager group.
Can you commit changes then?
--
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 510969] Review Request: valide - New Package IDE for vala
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510969 --- Comment #34 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-07-14 09:56:13 EDT --- (In reply to comment #33) yes sorry fixed Spec file: http://bioinformatiques.free.fr/SPECS/valide.spec SRC.RPM file: http://bioinformatiques.free.fr/SRPMS/valide-0.5.1-0.6.278svn.fc11.src.rpm $ su -c 'rpm -ivh rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/valide-0.5.1-0.6.278svn.fc11.x86_64.rpm' Mot de passe : Préparation... ### [100%] 1:valide ### [100%] $ which valide /usr/bin/valide $ su -c 'rpm -e valide /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.xtJcWO: line 3: /usr/bin/valide: No such file or directory ?? Why do you want to run valide as root when the rpm is installed / uninstalled ?? As I said in comment #31, I explained the reason for that error in comment #15. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 506339] Review Request: XZ Utils - LZMA Utils with newer file format
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=506339 --- Comment #21 from Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com 2009-07-14 10:08:55 EDT --- Orcan: shouldn't be an issue; triggers will fire on the package that provides 'lzma'. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497833] Review Request: tuna - Application tuning GUI command line utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497833 --- Comment #4 from Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo a...@redhat.com 2009-07-14 10:08:47 EDT --- New files that should address all the comments made: Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~acme/tuna/tuna.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~acme/tuna/tuna-0.9-1.fc11.src.rpm Please let me know if there are any still any problems. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
