From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 00:10:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 19:10:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 187569] New: Review Request: xfce4-mailwatch-plugin Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187569 Summary: Review Request: xfce4-mailwatch-plugin Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: fedora.wickert at arcor.de QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://home.arcor.de/christoph.wickert/fedora/extras-review/SPECS/xfce4-mailwatch-plugin.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://home.arcor.de/christoph.wickert/fedora/extras-review/SRPMS/xfce4-mailwatch-plugin-1.0.0-1.fc5.src.rpm Description: Mailwatch is a plugin for the Xfce 4 panel. It is intended to replace the current (4.0, 4.2) mail checker plugin in Xfce 4.4. It supports IMAP and POP, local mailboxes in Mbox, Maildir and MH-Maildir format as well as Gmail. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 00:41:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 19:41:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175630] Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604010041.k310fH05008968@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175630 Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|devel |fc5 ------- Additional Comments From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net 2006-03-31 19:41 EST ------- Updated packages for FC5 are available at: http://people.atrpms.net/~athimm/fedorasubmit/smart-0.41-27.src.rpm * Fri Mar 31 2006 Axel Thimm - 0.41-27 - Sync with specfile from Ville Skytt? - Add empty-description patch (upstream issue 64). - Update multi-version to include more kernel-* variants. - Add distro.d support. - Make owner of %%{_sysconfdir}/smart and %%{_localstatedir}/lib/smart{,/packages,/channels}. * Wed Dec 21 2005 Axel Thimm - 0.41-26 - Update to 0.41. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 00:44:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 19:44:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175631] Review Request: fedora-package-config-smart - Configuration files for the smart package manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604010044.k310iDIt009367@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fedora-package-config-smart - Configuration files for the smart package manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175631 Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|devel |fc5 ------- Additional Comments From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net 2006-03-31 19:44 EST ------- Updated packages for FC5 are available at: http://people.atrpms.net/~athimm/fedorasubmit/fedora-package-config-smart-5-4.src.rpm * Sat Apr 1 2006 Axel Thimm - 5-4 - Update to Fedora Core 5. * Tue Dec 13 2005 Axel Thimm - 4-3 - changed name to fedora-package-config-smart - Modify to only include what fedora-release includes for yum. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 01:04:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 20:04:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 175630] Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604010104.k31145xh012043@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175630 Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |Jochen at herr-schmitt.de ------- Additional Comments From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net 2006-03-31 20:03 EST ------- In reply to Jochen's review in bug 175631 comment 2: o the review is about the smart package, e.g. you probably wanted to add this to this bug report :) o smart-gui and smart-update are subpackages of smart and have no documentation directory of their own o new upstream release has been packaged o /etc/pam.d/* and /etc/security/console.apps/* are usually not replacable config files. o which parts are non UTF-8 encoded? Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From kevin.kofler at chello.at Sat Apr 1 03:25:31 2006 From: kevin.kofler at chello.at (Kevin Kofler) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 03:25:31 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Improper CVS Branching Requests References: <442C54CE.9090102@redhat.com> Message-ID: > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CVSSyncNeeded > * FC-4 FC-5 anjuta anjuta-docs anjuta-debuginfo > * FC-4 FC-5 fuse-emulator fuse-emulator-debuginfo > * FC-4 FC-5 lib765 lib765-devel lib765-debuginfo > * FC-4 FC-5 libdsk libdsk-devel libdsk-tools > * FC-4 FC-5 libspectrum libspectrum-devel > * FC-4 FC-5 z88dk > > I am not sure who did this, but please know that CVS branching is done > only on the source RPM of each package. Please do not list each sub > binary package name here. Are such branch requests even needed at all for updates? Anjuta, for example, already has an FC-5 branch. Kevin Kofler From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 05:46:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 00:46:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177277] Review Request: perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit : Portable LIMIT Emulation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604010546.k315kc1H018800@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit : Portable LIMIT Emulation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177277 tcallawa at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- BugsThisDependsOn| |177276 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-04-01 00:46 EST ------- New SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit-0.12-2.src.rpm New SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit.spec Note that I didn't add RPM_OPT_FLAGS to a noarch package, as that is just silly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 05:52:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 00:52:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177276] Review Request: perl-DBD-AnyData : DBI access to XML, CSV and other formats In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604010552.k315q4Lw019503@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-DBD-AnyData : DBI access to XML, CSV and other formats https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177276 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-04-01 00:51 EST ------- New SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-DBD-AnyData.spec New SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-DBD-AnyData-0.08-2.src.rpm Note that I didn't OPTIMIZE a noarch package because it is utterly pointless. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 05:54:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 00:54:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177275] Review Request: perl-AnyData: Easy access to data in many formats In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604010554.k315smBt019894@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-AnyData: Easy access to data in many formats https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177275 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-04-01 00:54 EST ------- New Spec: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-AnyData.spec New SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/perl-AnyData-0.10-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 06:40:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 01:40:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 184291] Review Request: gnokii - a mobile telephone manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604010640.k316esCi026227@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnokii - a mobile telephone manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184291 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-01 01:40 EST ------- Looks good, but a couple of little things: Please move the iconv invocations to %prep like other source modifications. In %install they're possibly done multiple times with rpmbuild -bi --short-circuit. xgnokii.pc refers to %{prefix}/share/xgnokii for xgnokii's data files, maybe it would be a good idea to have the xgnokii package create/own that dir. These can be changed after the import and before the first build, approved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 07:09:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 02:09:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 184291] Review Request: gnokii - a mobile telephone manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604010709.k3179256029724@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnokii - a mobile telephone manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184291 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-01 02:09 EST ------- (In reply to comment #9) > xgnokii.pc refers to %{prefix}/share/xgnokii Er, that's ${prefix}/share/xgnokii in pkgconfig terms and %{_prefix}/share/xgnokii in specfile terms. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 07:24:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 02:24:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177134] Review Request: mkvtoolnix - Matroska container utilites In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604010724.k317OATT031511@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mkvtoolnix - Matroska container utilites https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177134 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |ville.skytta at iki.fi OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-01 02:23 EST ------- Partial review while waiting for legal comments: - Change BR wxGTK2-devel to wxGTK-devel; the former is ambiguous with the wxGTK-devel and compat-wxGTK2-devel both providing it. - Unowned %{_datadir}/%{name} directory - (rpmlint:) Group tag for -gui should be changed to Applications/Multimedia - (rpmlint:) too long lines in %description, word-wrap at < 80 chars - FLAC support missing, adding BR: flac-devel >= 1.1.1 fixes it - Why disable bzip2 by default? Even rpm itself requires bzip2-libs so it won't add any dependency bloat. The same goes kind of with lzo in the sense that some popular multimedia packages which are somewhat likely to be installed on systems where this is require it, and it doesn't add any other deps, so I think it wouldn't hurt. If there's a good use case for having these disabled by default (or in the first place), please add a comment explaining it in the specfile. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Sat Apr 1 08:35:55 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 09:35:55 +0100 Subject: Unsure what to make of this output Message-ID: <1143880555.3477.1.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, I requested anjuta be build to FC4 last night and found the following this morning. To me, it looks like a buildsys problem, but it could equally be a number of other things. Would someone more knowledgeble please advise? 8--> Cleaning Root ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079 ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root ensuring dir /mnt/build/builder_work/d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/mock-state ensuring dir /mnt/build/builder_work/d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/result ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079 ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root ensuring dir /mnt/build/builder_work/d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/mock-state ensuring dir /mnt/build/builder_work/d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/result ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/var/lib/rpm ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/var/log ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/dev ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/etc/rpm ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/tmp ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/var/tmp ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/etc/yum.repos.d ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/proc ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/dev/pts ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/proc ensuring dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/dev/pts /usr/sbin/mock-helper yum --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root groupinstall build http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/plague-results/fedora-4-extras/repodata/primary.xml.gz: [Errno -1] Metadata file does not match checksum Trying other mirror. Error: failure: repodata/primary.xml.gz from local: [Errno 256] No more mirrors to try. Cleaning up... Done. <--8 TTFN Paul -- "ein zu starker starker Anblick kann Sie toten. Sie gegen gerade uber den Rand mit dem festen Wissen des Wege vor Ihnen" - Linus Tordvals -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 09:05:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 04:05:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 185498] Review Request: gjots2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604010905.k3195N59016315@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gjots2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185498 gemi at bluewin.ch changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |gemi at bluewin.ch OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From gemi at bluewin.ch 2006-04-01 04:05 EST ------- APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 1 09:27:23 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 11:27:23 +0200 Subject: Unsure what to make of this output In-Reply-To: <1143880555.3477.1.camel@T7.Linux> References: <1143880555.3477.1.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <442E477B.8090806@hhs.nl> You probably hit a mirror sync race window, just requeue the build Regards, Hans Paul wrote: > Hi, > > I requested anjuta be build to FC4 last night and found the following > this morning. To me, it looks like a buildsys problem, but it could > equally be a number of other things. > > Would someone more knowledgeble please advise? > > 8--> > Cleaning Root > ensuring > dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079 > ensuring > dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root > ensuring > dir /mnt/build/builder_work/d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/mock-state > ensuring > dir /mnt/build/builder_work/d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/result > ensuring > dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079 > ensuring > dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root > ensuring > dir /mnt/build/builder_work/d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/mock-state > ensuring > dir /mnt/build/builder_work/d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/result > ensuring > dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/var/lib/rpm > ensuring > dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/var/log > ensuring > dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/dev > ensuring > dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/etc/rpm > ensuring > dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/tmp > ensuring > dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/var/tmp > ensuring > dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/etc/yum.repos.d > ensuring > dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/proc > ensuring > dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/dev/pts > ensuring > dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/proc > ensuring > dir /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root/dev/pts > /usr/sbin/mock-helper yum > --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core-d38acd29df8dbabc4594dc17a447fda7dc938079/root groupinstall build > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/plague-results/fedora-4-extras/repodata/primary.xml.gz: [Errno -1] Metadata file does not match checksum > Trying other mirror. > Error: failure: repodata/primary.xml.gz from local: [Errno 256] No more > mirrors to try. > Cleaning up... > Done. > <--8 > > TTFN > > Paul > From duncan_j_ferguson at yahoo.co.uk Sat Apr 1 11:13:26 2006 From: duncan_j_ferguson at yahoo.co.uk (Duncan J Ferguson) Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 12:13:26 +0100 Subject: Package update problem (perl-X11-Protocol) Message-ID: <1143890006.25695.13.camel@queeg> I am trying to update a package I maintain, where I basically updated one spec file, and copied that into each branch (since there should be no other differences apart from a version update of the perl package). The build has worked for FC-4 and devel (waiting on FC-5 being created), but FC-3 build fails with this in the build log: === error: Unterminated {: {!?_with_X:\ 0< (empty) error: line 31: === This is a diff on the spec file showing I havnt changed anything near that line: === $ cvs diff -r 1.1 perl-X11-Protocol.spec For more information on using the Fedora source code repositories, please visit http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UsingCvs Index: perl-X11-Protocol.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-X11-Protocol/FC-3/perl-X11-Protocol.spec,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -r1.1 -r1.2 2,3c2,3 < Version: 0.54 < Release: 2%{?dist} --- > Version: 0.55 > Release: 1%{?dist} 9c9 < Source0: http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/S/SM/SMCCAM/X11-Protoco l-0.54.tar.gz --- > Source0: http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/S/SM/SMCCAM/X11-Protoco l-0.55.tar.gz 71a72,74 > * Fri Mar 31 2006 Duncan Ferguson 0.55-1 > - Update to new version of X11::Protocol > === and the offending line itself: === # Testing requires X - use "rpmbuild --with X" %{!?_with_X:\ %{__perl} -pi -e 'print "print \"Remaining tests require X\n\"; exit 0;" if /Insert your test code below/;' test.pl \ } === I did spot the missing '\' at the end of the %{__perl} line and have corrected it, but that has made no difference (build still fails) The build web page is (for the latest spec file): http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-3-extras/7098-perl-X11-Protocol-0.55-2.fc3/ What has happened such that this will no longer build (when it did originally for FC-3), and such that FC-4 and devel (FC-6?) still build fine. What do I need to do to fix this? Thanks Duncs ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 1 13:19:42 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 08:19:42 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060401131942.490238086@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 12 cfengine-2.1.20-1.fc3 perl-Class-Accessor-0.25-1.fc3 perl-Class-DBI-3.0.14-1.fc3 perl-Class-DBI-Loader-0.32-1.fc3 perl-Class-DBI-Pg-0.08-1.fc3 perl-Clone-0.20-1.fc3 perl-Image-ExifTool-6.09-1.fc3 perl-SQL-Abstract-1.21-1.fc3 perl-Spreadsheet-WriteExcel-2.16-1.fc3 perl-Taint-Runtime-0.02-1.fc3 perl-version-0.59-1.fc3 ser-0.9.6-6.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 1 13:19:58 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 08:19:58 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060401131958.B4B118086@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 13 anjuta-1.2.3-1.fc4 cfengine-2.1.20-1.fc4 perl-Class-Accessor-0.25-1.fc4 perl-Class-DBI-3.0.14-1.fc4 perl-Class-DBI-Loader-0.32-1.fc4 perl-Class-DBI-Pg-0.08-1.fc4 perl-Clone-0.20-1.fc4 perl-Image-ExifTool-6.09-1.fc4 perl-SQL-Abstract-1.21-1.fc4 perl-Spreadsheet-WriteExcel-2.16-1.fc4 perl-Taint-Runtime-0.02-1.fc4 perl-version-0.59-1.fc4 xfce4-xkb-plugin-0.3.5-1.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 1 13:20:22 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 08:20:22 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060401132022.7E21A8086@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 18 apmud-1.0.0-4.fc5 cfengine-2.1.20-1.fc5 dia-0.94-20 dia-0.94-21 gtkterm-0.99.5-1.fc5 njam-1.25-2.fc5 perl-Class-Accessor-0.25-1.fc5 perl-Class-DBI-3.0.14-1.fc5 perl-Class-DBI-Loader-0.32-1.fc5 perl-Class-DBI-Pg-0.08-1.fc5 perl-Clone-0.20-1.fc5 perl-Image-ExifTool-6.09-1.fc5 perl-SQL-Abstract-1.21-1.fc5 perl-Spreadsheet-WriteExcel-2.16-1.fc5 perl-Taint-Runtime-0.02-1.fc5 perl-version-0.59-1.fc5 shippy-1.3.3.7-2.fc5 xfce4-xkb-plugin-0.3.5-1.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 1 13:21:54 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 08:21:54 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060401132154.856BF8086@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 17 apmud-1.0.0-4.fc6 cfengine-2.1.20-1.fc6 denyhosts-2.2-5.fc6 denyhosts-2.2-6.fc6 gtkterm-0.99.5-1.fc6 perl-Class-Accessor-0.25-1.fc6 perl-Class-DBI-3.0.14-1.fc6 perl-Class-DBI-Loader-0.32-1.fc6 perl-Class-DBI-Pg-0.08-1.fc6 perl-Clone-0.20-1.fc6 perl-Image-ExifTool-6.09-1.fc6 perl-SQL-Abstract-1.21-1.fc6 perl-Spreadsheet-WriteExcel-2.16-1.fc6 perl-Taint-Runtime-0.02-1.fc6 perl-version-0.59-1.fc6 pitivi-0.9.9.2-3 xfce4-xkb-plugin-0.3.5-1.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 15:13:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 10:13:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 186909] Review Request: libmpcdec: Musepack audio decoding library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604011513.k31FDBOX031379@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libmpcdec: Musepack audio decoding library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186909 bugs.michael at gmx.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |bugs.michael at gmx.net OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-04-01 10:13 EST ------- Licence is not LGPL, but BSD (aka "New BSD" or "Modified BSD"): http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php Else: APPROVED I've contacted upstream to seek for clarification with regard to the use of the term "patentless code". The not-so-short response confirmed my initial assumptions. The current code means to be "free of patents" in a similar way like Ogg Vorbis (rpm -qi libvorbis). That statement on the web page is quite unfortunate, as it mixed past and present and thereby raises doubts for anybody who is not intimately familiar with the code. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 1 15:30:26 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 15:30:26 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-01 Message-ID: <20060401153026.25131.23721@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: dcbw AT redhat.com package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: tcallawa AT redhat.com package: ebtables - 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: libebt_stp.so libebt_limit.so libebtable_filter.so libebt_ip.so libebt_standard.so libebt_arpreply.so libebtc.so libebt_mark_m.so libebt_pkttype.so libebtable_nat.so libebt_mark.so libebt_vlan.so libebt_ulog.so libebt_log.so libebtable_broute.so libebt_802_3.so libebt_nat.so libebt_redirect.so libebt_arp.so libebt_among.so package: ebtables - 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: libebt_arp.so()(64bit) libebt_802_3.so()(64bit) libebt_mark_m.so()(64bit) libebt_stp.so()(64bit) libebt_standard.so()(64bit) libebt_among.so()(64bit) libebt_mark.so()(64bit) libebt_pkttype.so()(64bit) libebt_vlan.so()(64bit) libebt_redirect.so()(64bit) libebtable_nat.so()(64bit) libebt_arpreply.so()(64bit) libebt_limit.so()(64bit) libebt_nat.so()(64bit) libebt_ip.so()(64bit) libebt_log.so()(64bit) libebtable_broute.so()(64bit) libebt_ulog.so()(64bit) libebtc.so()(64bit) libebtable_filter.so()(64bit) From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 1 15:31:09 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 15:31:09 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-01 Message-ID: <20060401153109.25194.37995@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc5.i386 rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc5.ppc rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc5.x86_64 rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: jeff AT ultimateevil.org package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: tcallawa AT redhat.com package: rekall-devel - 2.2.4-8.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libkbase.so.0 rekall = 0:2.2.4-8.fc5 libkbase_kde.so.0 libkbase_common.so.0 libkbase_app.so.0 libkbase_tkwidgets.so.0 libel_interp.so.0 libel_compile.so.0 package: ebtables - 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libebt_limit.so libebtable_filter.so libebt_ip.so libebt_standard.so libebt_arpreply.so libebtc.so libebt_mark_m.so libebt_pkttype.so libebtable_nat.so libebt_mark.so libebt_vlan.so libebt_ulog.so libebt_log.so libebtable_broute.so libebt_stp.so libebt_802_3.so libebt_nat.so libebt_redirect.so libebt_arp.so libebt_among.so package: rekall-devel - 2.2.4-8.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: rekall = 0:2.2.4-8.fc5 libkbase_tkwidgets.so.0()(64bit) libel_interp.so.0()(64bit) libkbase_common.so.0()(64bit) libkbase_kde.so.0()(64bit) libkbase.so.0()(64bit) libel_compile.so.0()(64bit) libkbase_app.so.0()(64bit) package: ebtables - 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libebt_arp.so()(64bit) libebt_802_3.so()(64bit) libebt_log.so()(64bit) libebt_mark_m.so()(64bit) libebt_stp.so()(64bit) libebt_standard.so()(64bit) libebt_among.so()(64bit) libebt_mark.so()(64bit) libebt_pkttype.so()(64bit) libebt_vlan.so()(64bit) libebt_redirect.so()(64bit) libebtable_nat.so()(64bit) libebt_arpreply.so()(64bit) libebt_limit.so()(64bit) libebt_nat.so()(64bit) libebt_ip.so()(64bit) libebtable_broute.so()(64bit) libebt_ulog.so()(64bit) libebtc.so()(64bit) libebtable_filter.so()(64bit) package: ebtables - 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libebt_limit.so libebtable_filter.so libebt_ip.so libebt_standard.so libebt_arpreply.so libebtc.so libebt_mark_m.so libebt_pkttype.so libebtable_nat.so libebt_mark.so libebt_vlan.so libebt_ulog.so libebt_log.so libebtable_broute.so libebt_stp.so libebt_802_3.so libebt_nat.so libebt_redirect.so libebt_arp.so libebt_among.so package: rekall-devel - 2.2.4-8.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libkbase.so.0 rekall = 0:2.2.4-8.fc5 libkbase_kde.so.0 libkbase_common.so.0 libkbase_app.so.0 libkbase_tkwidgets.so.0 libel_interp.so.0 libel_compile.so.0 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 1 15:30:55 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 15:30:55 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-01 Message-ID: <20060401153055.25163.30140@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc4.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc4.ppc plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc4.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: dcbw AT redhat.com package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: tcallawa AT redhat.com package: ebtables - 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: libebt_limit.so libebtable_filter.so libebt_ip.so libebt_standard.so libebt_arpreply.so libebtc.so libebt_mark_m.so libebt_pkttype.so libebtable_nat.so libebt_mark.so libebt_vlan.so libebt_ulog.so libebt_log.so libebtable_broute.so libebt_stp.so libebt_802_3.so libebt_nat.so libebt_redirect.so libebt_arp.so libebt_among.so package: ebtables - 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: libebt_arp.so()(64bit) libebt_802_3.so()(64bit) libebt_log.so()(64bit) libebt_mark_m.so()(64bit) libebt_stp.so()(64bit) libebt_standard.so()(64bit) libebt_among.so()(64bit) libebt_mark.so()(64bit) libebt_pkttype.so()(64bit) libebt_vlan.so()(64bit) libebt_redirect.so()(64bit) libebtable_nat.so()(64bit) libebt_arpreply.so()(64bit) libebt_limit.so()(64bit) libebt_nat.so()(64bit) libebt_ip.so()(64bit) libebtable_broute.so()(64bit) libebt_ulog.so()(64bit) libebtc.so()(64bit) libebtable_filter.so()(64bit) package: ebtables - 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: libebt_limit.so libebtable_filter.so libebt_ip.so libebt_standard.so libebt_arpreply.so libebtc.so libebt_mark_m.so libebt_pkttype.so libebtable_nat.so libebt_mark.so libebt_vlan.so libebt_ulog.so libebt_log.so libebtable_broute.so libebt_stp.so libebt_802_3.so libebt_nat.so libebt_redirect.so libebt_arp.so libebt_among.so From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 1 15:46:21 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 15:46:21 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-01 Message-ID: <20060401154621.25507.97668@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc6.i386 rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc6.ppc rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc6.x86_64 rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: jeff AT ultimateevil.org package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: gauret AT free.fr package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113 package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113()(64bit) package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: tcallawa AT redhat.com package: ebtables - 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libebt_stp.so libebt_limit.so libebtable_filter.so libebt_ip.so libebt_standard.so libebt_arpreply.so libebtc.so libebt_mark_m.so libebt_pkttype.so libebtable_nat.so libebt_mark.so libebt_vlan.so libebt_ulog.so libebt_log.so libebtable_broute.so libebt_802_3.so libebt_nat.so libebt_redirect.so libebt_arp.so libebt_among.so package: rekall-devel - 2.2.4-8.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libkbase.so.0 rekall = 0:2.2.4-8.fc5 libkbase_kde.so.0 libkbase_common.so.0 libkbase_app.so.0 libkbase_tkwidgets.so.0 libel_interp.so.0 libel_compile.so.0 package: ebtables - 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc6.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libebt_arp.so()(64bit) libebt_802_3.so()(64bit) libebt_log.so()(64bit) libebt_mark_m.so()(64bit) libebt_stp.so()(64bit) libebt_standard.so()(64bit) libebt_among.so()(64bit) libebt_mark.so()(64bit) libebt_pkttype.so()(64bit) libebt_vlan.so()(64bit) libebt_redirect.so()(64bit) libebtable_nat.so()(64bit) libebt_arpreply.so()(64bit) libebt_limit.so()(64bit) libebt_nat.so()(64bit) libebt_ip.so()(64bit) libebtable_broute.so()(64bit) libebt_ulog.so()(64bit) libebtc.so()(64bit) libebtable_filter.so()(64bit) package: rekall-devel - 2.2.4-8.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: rekall = 0:2.2.4-8.fc5 libkbase_tkwidgets.so.0()(64bit) libel_interp.so.0()(64bit) libkbase_common.so.0()(64bit) libkbase_kde.so.0()(64bit) libkbase.so.0()(64bit) libel_compile.so.0()(64bit) libkbase_app.so.0()(64bit) package: ebtables - 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libebt_stp.so libebt_limit.so libebtable_filter.so libebt_ip.so libebt_standard.so libebt_arpreply.so libebtc.so libebt_mark_m.so libebt_pkttype.so libebtable_nat.so libebt_mark.so libebt_vlan.so libebt_ulog.so libebt_log.so libebtable_broute.so libebt_802_3.so libebt_nat.so libebt_redirect.so libebt_arp.so libebt_among.so package: rekall-devel - 2.2.4-8.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libkbase.so.0 rekall = 0:2.2.4-8.fc5 libkbase_kde.so.0 libkbase_common.so.0 libkbase_app.so.0 libkbase_tkwidgets.so.0 libel_interp.so.0 libel_compile.so.0 From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 16:10:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 11:10:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 186909] Review Request: libmpcdec: Musepack audio decoding library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604011610.k31GAtfJ007477@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libmpcdec: Musepack audio decoding library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186909 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-01 11:10 EST ------- Thanks Michael for the clarification(s). I'll import and change the license (not sure where I got LGPL from??) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From ville.skytta at iki.fi Sat Apr 1 17:14:11 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 20:14:11 +0300 Subject: Package update problem (perl-X11-Protocol) In-Reply-To: <1143890006.25695.13.camel@queeg> References: <1143890006.25695.13.camel@queeg> Message-ID: <1143911651.14043.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sat, 2006-04-01 at 12:13 +0100, Duncan J Ferguson wrote: > error: Unterminated {: {!?_with_X:\ Backslashification inside specfile expressions like the above is not supported everywhere. You can achieve the same effect in a way that works better across more rpm versions, eg. like: %if 0%{!?_with_X:1} # insert stuff that should be done in non-X builds here %endif From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 17:19:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 12:19:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 177483] Review Request: subversion-api-docs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604011719.k31HJxlr017292@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: subversion-api-docs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177483 toshio at tiki-lounge.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From toshio at tiki-lounge.com 2006-04-01 12:19 EST ------- 8888a30767fe277cd193bee2cfe0af95 subversion-api-docs-1.3.0-1.src.rpm All issues have been addressed. ACCEPTED The one thing I noted is that you should always bump the release when you make a new version, even while it is in review. Please remember this for next time. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 18:04:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 13:04:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 186909] Review Request: libmpcdec: Musepack audio decoding library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604011804.k31I48Cp024462@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libmpcdec: Musepack audio decoding library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186909 rdieter at math.unl.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-01 13:03 EST ------- Imported, build queued. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 18:04:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 13:04:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 186912] Review Request: k3b-extras: Free codec plugins for k3b In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604011804.k31I4UbO024564@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: k3b-extras: Free codec plugins for k3b https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186912 Bug 186912 depends on bug 186909, which changed state. Bug 186909 Summary: Review Request: libmpcdec: Musepack audio decoding library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186909 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 18:27:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 13:27:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 187266] Review Request: gprolog - GNU Prolog is a free Prolog compiler In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604011827.k31IRltw027607@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gprolog - GNU Prolog is a free Prolog compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187266 ------- Additional Comments From gemi at bluewin.ch 2006-04-01 13:27 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > could safely delete BINPROLOG, CIAO, SICSTUS, SWI, WAMCC, XSB and YAP from the > ExamplesPl directory; they aren't even intended to be used by gprolog. These should really be deleted! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 18:39:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 13:39:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 187609] New: Review Request: tre - POSIX compatible regexp library with approximate matching Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187609 Summary: Review Request: tre - POSIX compatible regexp library with approximate matching Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: rpm at greysector.net QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/tre.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/tre-0.7.2-1.src.rpm Description: TRE is a lightweight, robust, and efficient POSIX compatible regexp matching library with some exciting features such as approximate matching. The patch fixes a known bug and can be found here (link from TRE's homepage): http://laurikari.net/darcs/darcs.cgi/tre-head/?c=diff&p=20050328185603-ced27-23246308f3c1926f51c111b78207e1536a202452.gz -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 18:47:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 13:47:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 187610] New: Review Request: crm114 - CRM114 Bayesian Spam Detector Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187610 Summary: Review Request: crm114 - CRM114 Bayesian Spam Detector Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: rpm at greysector.net QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/crm114.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/crm114-0-1.20060118.src.rpm Description: CRM114 is a system to examine incoming e-mail, system log streams, data files or other data streams, and to sort, filter, or alter the incoming files or data streams according to the user's wildest desires. Criteria for categorization of data can be by satisfaction of regexes, by sparse binary polynomial matching with a Bayesian Chain Rule evaluator, or by other means. Note: BuildRequires tre-devel, which I submitted as #187609 . -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 19:04:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 14:04:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 187304] Review Request: echoping latency meassure tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604011904.k31J4ecs000571@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: echoping latency meassure tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187304 fedora.wickert at arcor.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora.wickert at arcor.de OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-04-01 14:04 EST ------- NOTE: I cannot approve your package atm, a) because of the MUST items that need to be fixed first (see below) and b) because I'm not approved for reviewing yet, this is my first review. @FE-list: Feedback is welcome, especially on the openssl license. The license is GPL with the following addition: > The following note is not part of the GPL: > > echoping adds a small permission to the GPL: This program is released > under the GPL with the additional exemption that compiling, linking, > and/or using the OpenSSL library is allowed. > > See and > > for details. > > GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE > Version 2, June 1991 > [...] So IMO this package should be released unter GPL since the GPL is more restrictive than the "BSDish" license of openssl, right? REVIEW: sha1sum echoping-5.2.0-0.src.rpm aaa4f871e4950411572a873eb7ef83046ecb2f2e echoping-5.2.0-0.src.rpm md5sum echoping-5.2.0-0.src.rpm caf9a5c5d12ca848ac68eaa5c941e5f4 echoping-5.2.0-0.src.rpm Good: - rpmlint clean on all packages - package and spec naming OK for FE - package meets FE guidelines - license GPL - license field in specfile correct - spec file written in English - sources match upstream by both md5 and sha1 sums - package builds OK on FC5 i386 and in mock for rawhide i386 - BR's OK, no duplicates - no locales to worry about - no shared libraries, no need for ldconfig - relocatable - no duplicate files - package installs and removes fine - %clean section present and correct - no scriptlets needed - code, not content - no large docs - docs don't affect runtime - no static libraries or headers to worry about - no pkgconfigs to worry about - package doesn't own other package's directories - no desktop file needed - package works fine on FC5 i386 Needswork: - MUST: increase the release to -1, -0* is not a valid release (at least for a stable version) "The release number is how the maintainer marks build revisions, _starting_from_1_", see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#head-5ea39bbc33cf351b41b51325ac3527eff4c58dac - MUST: directory ownership or permissions issues as %defattr is wrong: Change "%defattr(-, root, root)" to "%defattr(-, root, root,-)" - SHOULD: Spec could be a little more legible. IMHO all FE specfiles should start with a fresh fedora-newrpmspec - SHOULD: make macro usage more consistent: Please use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT instead of %{buildroot} - SHOULD: please change "%{__make} %{?_smp_mflags}" to "make %{?_smp_mflags}" (just for simplicity, there's no need to need to cover make with a macro) - SHOULD: remove the empty NEWS from %doc. - SHOULD: I suggest you add DETAILS to the %doc section as well. - SHOULD: Please change "Initial RPM release" to something like "Initial Fedora Extras release". There are already some echoping rpms in 3rd party repos. NEEDSWORK. I have cleaned up you specfile and fixed above issues. Attaching a patch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 19:44:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 14:44:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 187613] New: Review Request: sm_tool Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187613 Summary: Review Request: sm_tool Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: jesusr at redhat.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://zeusville.homeip.net/sm_tool/sm_tool.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://zeusville.homeip.net/sm_tool/sm_tool-1.10-1.src.rpm Description: python script to upload picture via XMLRPC to www.smugmug.com This is my first package and I'm seeking a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 21:21:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 16:21:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 186811] Review Request: libnfnetlink - Netfilter netlink userspace library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604012121.k31LLP9Q019690@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libnfnetlink - Netfilter netlink userspace library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186811 ------- Additional Comments From bugzilla.redhat at neufeind.net 2006-04-01 16:21 EST ------- Unfortunately I can't judge about the spec in detail. But I did build and try the three related packages (libnfnetlink, libnetfilter_conntrack and conntrack). They did build and install fine, conntrack seems to work fine as well. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 21:34:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 16:34:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 186912] Review Request: k3b-extras: Free codec plugins for k3b In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604012134.k31LY7Tx021663@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: k3b-extras: Free codec plugins for k3b https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186912 bugs.michael at gmx.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-04-01 16:34 EST ------- * The "k3b >= 0.12.14" requirement is too much. "k3b >= 0.12" for the k3b 0.12 series would be acceptable. FC-4 still includes k3b-0.12.10 where this k3b-extras package _would_ install and work just fine. Whether the k3b soname versions are strict enough? Maybe. libk3bdevice's soname has not changed since k3b 0.11, though. * "BR taglib-devel libmusicbrainz-devel" not needed. Else: APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From steve at silug.org Sat Apr 1 21:51:34 2006 From: steve at silug.org (Steven Pritchard) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 15:51:34 -0600 Subject: File upload doesn't work In-Reply-To: <20060331011956.GA25252@osiris.silug.org> References: <1143622945.3838.19.camel@perun.kabelta.loc> <1143657623.14504.0.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> <1143658020.8872.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060329192506.GA3075@osiris.silug.org> <20060331011956.GA25252@osiris.silug.org> Message-ID: <20060401215134.GA28436@osiris.silug.org> On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 07:19:56PM -0600, I wrote: > So I take it I'm the only one seeing something like this? > > $ make new-sources FILES=celestia-1.4.1.tar.gz > > Checking : celestia-1.4.1.tar.gz on https://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/repo/extras/upload.cgi... > ERROR: could not check remote file status > make: *** [new-sources] Error 255 So it turns out that if I ran curl manually, I'd get something like this: * getaddrinfo(3) failed for cvs.fedora.redhat.com:443 * Couldn't resolve host 'cvs.fedora.redhat.com' * Closing connection #0 curl: (6) Couldn't resolve host 'cvs.fedora.redhat.com' Name resolution seemed to be working fine, but I also noticed that yum was failing also. To make a long story short, the glibc update last week seemed to be having fits over my (ancient) /etc/nsswitch.conf. Replacing that with a vanilla copy fixed everything. Whee. Steve -- Steven Pritchard - K&S Pritchard Enterprises, Inc. Email: steve at kspei.com http://www.kspei.com/ Phone: (618)398-3000 Mobile: (618)567-7320 From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 23:14:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 18:14:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 186912] Review Request: k3b-extras: Free codec plugins for k3b In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604012314.k31NEY71002743@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: k3b-extras: Free codec plugins for k3b https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186912 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-01 18:14 EST ------- > Requires: k3b >= 0.12 agreed. > Extraneous BR: taglib-devel, libmusicbrainz-devel good point. Don't forget the we're including sndfile decoder (libsndfile) here which would (currently) conflict with a certain other pkg from that other must-not-be-named repo. (-: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 23:29:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 18:29:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 187621] New: Review Request: blam Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187621 Summary: Review Request: blam Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: foolish at guezz.net QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/blam.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/blam-1.8.2-1.src.rpm Description: Blam is a tool that helps you keep track of the growing number of news feeds distributed as RSS. Blam lets you subscribe to any number of feeds and provides an easy to use and clean interface to stay up to date -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 1 23:35:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 18:35:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 187622] New: Review Request: cowbell Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187622 Summary: Review Request: cowbell Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: foolish at guezz.net QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/cowbell.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/cowbell-0.2.6.1-1.src.rpm Description: Cowbell is an elegant, album-based, music organizer written by Brad Taylor in C# for Gtk+. Using TagLib, it supports many audio formats including: Mp3, Ogg Vorbis and MusePack -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 00:13:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 19:13:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 186912] Review Request: k3b-extras: Free codec plugins for k3b In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604020013.k320DOQo010672@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: k3b-extras: Free codec plugins for k3b https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186912 rdieter at math.unl.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-01 19:13 EST ------- Thanks, imported. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 00:52:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 19:52:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 187625] New: Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187625 Summary: Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: rjune at bravegnuworld.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com I do not have a sponsor for this. It passes RPMLint, and I believe it adheres to the guidelines. ices.spec: http://home.bravegnuworld.com/~rjune/rpm/SPECS/ices.spec ices-2.0.1-0.1.src.rpm: http://home.bravegnuworld.com/~rjune/rpm/SRPMS/ices-2.0.1-0.1.src.rpm Description: IceS is a source client for a streaming server. The purpose of this client is to provide an audio stream to a streaming server such that one or more listeners can access the stream. With this layout, this source client can be situated remotely from the icecast server -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 02:08:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 21:08:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 187625] Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604020208.k3228IvU026418@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187625 ivazquez at ivazquez.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |177841 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-04-01 21:08 EST ------- - Release should start at 1 - Summary should not contain the app name - Drop / before %{_localstatedir} and %{_sysconfdir} - Need to own %{_datadir}/%{name} - Don't be afraid to use %{name} and %{version} where appropriate -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 02:43:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 21:43:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 187625] Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604020243.k322hjBp031352@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187625 ------- Additional Comments From rjune at bravegnuworld.com 2006-04-01 21:43 EST ------- Fixed all of those. ices-2.0.1-2.src.rpm: http://home.bravegnuworld.com/~rjune/rpm/SRPMS/ices-2.0.1-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From dan at danny.cz Sun Apr 2 07:50:20 2006 From: dan at danny.cz (Dan =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hor=E1k?=) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 09:50:20 +0200 Subject: Taking ownership of gtkterm. In-Reply-To: <442D90A5.6010901@hhs.nl> References: <442D90A5.6010901@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1143964220.3403.8.camel@eagle.danny.cz> Hans de Goede p??e v P? 31. 03. 2006 v 22:27 +0200: > Hi, > > About 24 hours ago I've asked if there was any objection if I would > pickup gtkterm, no one objected so I'm taking it. I now this is a bit > quick, but I took a look and have a new version ready so this time is as > good as any. As I see in the build reports, gtkterm is built for FC5 and devel. Is it possible to built it also for FC4? Dan From ville.skytta at iki.fi Sun Apr 2 09:16:38 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 12:16:38 +0300 Subject: rpms/gnome-yum/FC-5 gnome-yum-0.1.3-1.fc5.src.rpm, NONE, 1.1.2.1 gnome-yum-0.1.3.tar.bz2, NONE, 1.2.4.1 In-Reply-To: <200604020712.k327Cqpa006294@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200604020712.k327Cqpa006294@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1143969398.14043.90.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sun, 2006-04-02 at 00:12 -0700, Andr?s T?th wrote: > Author: tbandi72 > > Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gnome-yum/FC-5 > In directory cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv6279 > > Added Files: > Tag: gnome-yum-0_1_3-1_fc5 > gnome-yum-0.1.3-1.fc5.src.rpm gnome-yum-0.1.3.tar.bz2 > Log Message: Oops, you've imported the gnome-yum source rpm and source tarball binary blobs into CVS for FC-4 and FC-5, please remove them. Refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsingCvsFaq for instructions how to use FE CVS. From christoph.wickert at nurfuerspam.de Sun Apr 2 16:00:22 2006 From: christoph.wickert at nurfuerspam.de (Christoph Wickert) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 18:00:22 +0200 Subject: taking ownership of gwget Message-ID: <1143993623.3037.6.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Thorsten has asked me (#187623) to take over gwget. I agreed and owners.list is already updated. Christoph From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 16:59:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 12:59:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187684] New: Review Request:
Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187684 Summary: Review Request:
Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: atennent at learn.senecac.on.ca QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://tux.senecac.on.ca/~atennent/driftnet.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://tux.senecac.on.ca/~atennent/driftnet-0.1.6-1.src.rpm Description: An amusement that displays JPG and GIF images from network packets, live. it must be run as root. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 2 17:54:54 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 13:54:54 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060402175454.A5BB97FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 1 perl-X11-Protocol-0.55-3.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 2 17:55:00 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 13:55:00 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060402175500.D5C8D7FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 8 apmud-1.0.0-3 fuse-emulator-0.7.0-6.fc4 gnome-yum-0.1.3-1.fc4 lib765-0.3.3-6.fc4 libdsk-1.1.6-1.fc4 libspectrum-0.2.2-4.fc4 perl-X11-Protocol-0.55-3.fc4 z88dk-1.6-8.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 2 17:55:17 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 13:55:17 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060402175517.B07E17FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 10 azureus-2.4.0.3-0.20060328cvs_1.fc5 azureus-2.4.0.3-0.20060328cvs_2.fc5 brightside-1.4.0-11.fc5 gnome-yum-0.1.3-1.fc5 graveman-0.3.12.4-4.fc5 graveman-0.3.12.4-5.fc5 gwget-0.97-3.fc5 lib765-0.3.3-6.fc5 python-myghty-1.0.1-2.fc5 rssowl-1.2-13.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 2 17:55:23 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 13:55:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060402175523.E93DA7FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 7 graveman-0.3.12.4-5.fc6 k3b-extras-0.12.14-2.fc6 lib765-0.3.4-1.fc6 libdsk-1.1.9-1.fc6 libmpcdec-1.2.2-2.fc6 perl-X11-Protocol-0.55-3.fc6 pwgen-2.05-3.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From ch.nolte at fh-wolfenbuettel.de Sun Apr 2 17:56:51 2006 From: ch.nolte at fh-wolfenbuettel.de (Christian Nolte) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 19:56:51 +0200 Subject: [ifolder3] RPM packages Message-ID: <44301063.6020803@fh-wolfenbuettel.de> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello everyone! I have put together necessary RPM's for ifolder3. ifolder3 enables users to do file-sharing and synchronizing of such folder-contents over a network. See http://www.ifolder.com for details. I am aware of the package review process as I am already a maintainer in fedora-extras, but the thing which holds me back are potential issues because this implementation is based on mono. I am not sure if there is already a consensus about permitting extras contributors to provide mono-based packages. I have only found one discussion in fedora-list about this problem: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2006-January/msg01049.html The other thing is that this are 5 packages for only the client and one additional package for the ifolder3-server (which I have _not_ packaged yet) and that I have momentarily not much time at hand to maintain them all. So perhaps there is someone who could take some of these packages. In any case, you can find the SPEC-files and SRPMS here: http://www.noltec.org/open-source/ifolder3/ The packages needed for the client part of ifolder3 are: log4net, libflaim, simias, ifolder3, nautilus-ifolder3 Currently I have some known issues with the packages (see the SPEC-files also) and it would be great if anyone could tell me how to solve these: 1. The separation of the normal and devel subpackages do not work somehow. I have to install both of them because otherwise the .so files are missing and nothing works. This regards libflaim/libflaim-devel, simias/simias-devel and ifolder3/ifolder3-devel 2. ifolder3 and nautilus-ifolder3 contain one lib each with a standard rpath. Giving --disable-rpath to the configure scripts does nothing to this problem. In effect these two packages must be built with exporting QA_RPATHS=$[ 0x0001 ]; 3. I've had some weird issues with compiling simias and ifolder3 using make %{?_smp_mflags} (which expands to make -j3 on my build machine). The build would fail all the time with compiler-errors. Using make without smp-mflags solved this problem for me. So that's basically it. As mentioned before I have not put together a server package and as it turns out ifolder3 is currently pretty useless without a server because the p2p sharing is being worked on and is not available in the client. Furthermore the mDNSResponder-Code which simias uses to announce ifolder's on a network is for now only available in CVS. I also don't know if it works with avahi. A quick search for using ifolder with avahi shows this discussion: http://www.mail-archive.com/avahi at lists.freedesktop.org/msg00146.html For now I see all this as some preliminary work which perhaps could be of help to someone who also wants to package ifolder for fedora. Perhaps we could work together on doing so. Best regards! Christian - -- Christian Nolte key : http://www.noltec.org/christian-nolte.asc or : www.keyserver.net - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Information Revolution will be fought on the command line. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEMBBjCNjA0nfhW7wRAojEAJ9ELwS1x/z9VRJ6dsgkgdy0Hfu2ZACgvArt lQRNAcvqSMw4LSLxCj51R94= =/Vis -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 18:04:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 14:04:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175127] Review Request: wavbreaker - Tool for splitting .wav files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604021804.k32I4bVr016360@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wavbreaker - Tool for splitting .wav files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175127 adrian at lisas.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163779 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From adrian at lisas.de 2006-04-02 14:04 EST ------- Don't copy the files to the doc directory. Just add following line to your %files section: %doc ChangeLog CONTRIBUTORS NEWS AUTHORS COPYING README TODO -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 18:07:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 14:07:10 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187684] Review Request: driftnet In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604021807.k32I7AKg016816@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: driftnet https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187684 adrian at lisas.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE OtherBugsDependingO|163776 | nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From adrian at lisas.de 2006-04-02 14:06 EST ------- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 172871 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 18:07:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 14:07:42 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172871] Review Request: driftnet In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604021807.k32I7ges016888@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: driftnet https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172871 adrian at lisas.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |atennent at learn.senecac.on.ca ------- Additional Comments From adrian at lisas.de 2006-04-02 14:07 EST ------- *** Bug 187684 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From rdieter at math.unl.edu Sun Apr 2 18:33:24 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 13:33:24 -0500 Subject: [ifolder3] RPM packages In-Reply-To: <44301063.6020803@fh-wolfenbuettel.de> References: <44301063.6020803@fh-wolfenbuettel.de> Message-ID: Christian Nolte wrote: > I have put together necessary RPM's for ifolder3. ifolder3 enables users > to do file-sharing and synchronizing of such folder-contents over a > network. See http://www.ifolder.com for details. > > I am aware of the package review process as I am already a maintainer in > fedora-extras, but the thing which holds me back are potential issues > because this implementation is based on mono. AFAIK, Mono is in FC5, so it should be OK. (-: -- Rex From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 18:32:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 14:32:06 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187622] Review Request: cowbell In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604021832.k32IW67X020414@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cowbell https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187622 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: cowbell |Review Request: cowbell ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-04-02 14:32 EST ------- Build failed on x86_64. File not found: /var/tmp/cowbell-0.2.6.1-1-root-mockbuild/usr/lib64/cowbell Apparently mono apps install to %{_prefix}/lib. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Mono Need more cowbell!!! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 18:38:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 14:38:35 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185261] Review Request: gnochm - CHM file viewer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604021838.k32IcZA8021825@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnochm - CHM file viewer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185261 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-04-02 14:38 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > I didn't add a BR on shared-mime-info, because this is explicitely said here > that such BR shouldn't be added: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ScriptletSnippets#head-ef39068afc1677de2e6b4370ad0fb24dafd4d47b OK. And it did build and runs. APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 19:30:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 15:30:04 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177232] Review Request: regionset - reads/sets the region code of DVD drives In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604021930.k32JU4j8028154@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: regionset - reads/sets the region code of DVD drives https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177232 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at greysector.net 2006-04-02 15:29 EST ------- Fixed in http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/regionset-0.1-2.src.rpm (spec address the same as above) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 19:44:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 15:44:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182941] Review Request: nessus-core Network vulnerability scanner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604021944.k32JiT6L031079@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nessus-core Network vulnerability scanner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182941 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |jpmahowald at gmail.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-04-02 15:44 EST ------- In the %description of nessus-core the 75,000 user number is duplicated. Delete one. Upon login the server says Cannot create a new dumpfile /var/log/nessus/nessusd.dump (No such file or directory)-- aborting This directory needs to exist and be owned by the server. Becuase the tarball includes the license, nessus/COPYING, include that in %doc For some reason every scan I've tried so far comes up empty. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 19:59:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 15:59:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181369] Review Request: libedit - The NetBSD Editline library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604021959.k32JxS7l000645@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libedit - The NetBSD Editline library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181369 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163776, 177841 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-04-02 15:59 EST ------- 2.9-2 builds fine. APPROVED. Apply for cvsextras in the account system, I'll sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 2 20:06:43 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 20:06:43 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-02 Message-ID: <20060402200643.5042.69496@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 2 20:06:55 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 20:06:55 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-02 Message-ID: <20060402200655.5047.1063@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc4.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc4.ppc plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc4.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 2 20:07:07 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 20:07:07 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-02 Message-ID: <20060402200707.5052.58373@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc5.i386 rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc5.ppc rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc5.x86_64 rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 2 20:07:22 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 20:07:22 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-02 Message-ID: <20060402200722.5057.87058@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc6.i386 rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc6.ppc rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebtables 2.0.8-0.3.rc1.fc6.x86_64 rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 20:05:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 16:05:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177105] Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604022005.k32K5h3p001580@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177105 rpm at greysector.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |ASSIGNED Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From rpm at greysector.net 2006-04-02 16:05 EST ------- Fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 20:10:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 16:10:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187433] Review Request: acx-kmod - Open ACX100/ACX111 wireless NIC driver In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604022010.k32KAHtX002210@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: acx-kmod - Open ACX100/ACX111 wireless NIC driver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187433 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at greysector.net 2006-04-02 16:10 EST ------- Ideally, the -common package should contain the firmwares IMHO. But since it's questionable whether it's distributable, this is what we're stuck with. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 20:20:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 16:20:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177104] Review Request: abook - Text-based addressbook program for mutt In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604022020.k32KK3xt003545@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: abook - Text-based addressbook program for mutt https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177104 rpm at greysector.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |ASSIGNED Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From rpm at greysector.net 2006-04-02 16:19 EST ------- Fixed. http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/abook-0.5.5-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 20:35:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 16:35:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 180015] Review Request: OTRS - Open Ticket Request System In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604022035.k32KZaM4006172@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: OTRS - Open Ticket Request System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180015 imlinux at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-04-02 16:35 EST ------- Built and released. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From kevin.kofler at chello.at Sun Apr 2 21:04:37 2006 From: kevin.kofler at chello.at (Kevin Kofler) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 21:04:37 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Some confusion about Extras processes Message-ID: I've noticed that there appears to be some confusion about some of the processes in Fedora Extras (in particular, the role of CvsSyncNeeded). Sorry if I'm the one who is confused, but in either case, it would be nice if someone could clear things up. 1. CvsSyncNeeded contains some requests touching the repository, not the CVS: * Remove ppc package of gnome-applet-sensors, version 1.4-3. This package does not work on ppc and has been rebuilt to 1.4-4 with the appropriate ExcludeArch, but the older broken package still exists in the ppc repo. * Remove argus[-clients]-2.0.6.fixes1-7 builds from fc-4, fc-5, and devel; there were errors during build, but poorly done argus makefile didn't die. I fixed the problem in release 8, and would like 7 to go away. * Remove gambas-*1.0.11 packages from the repos for all branches (FC-3, FC-4, FC-5). This will resolve bugzilla 186274. Shouldn't these be files under FC5Status resp. FC4Status under the heading "Remove Request" instead? (And I'm not convinced the argus -7 builds need removal at all, -8 supercedes them anyway.) 2. CvsSyncNeeded also contained branch requests for branches already in the repository, see: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-April/msg00004.html These have been deleted with no apparent action done to the CVS. Isn't the right way here to "cvs-import.sh -b FC-5"? If so, could the people who handle CVS branch requests please next time point the maintainer of the affected messages to the ExtrasCvsFaq instead of silently ignoring the request? Or is this being handled with some script which appears to succeed with no errors and does nothing if you run it on already-existing branches? Kevin Kofler From ville.skytta at iki.fi Sun Apr 2 21:23:27 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 00:23:27 +0300 Subject: Some confusion about Extras processes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1144013007.14043.267.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sun, 2006-04-02 at 21:04 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > 1. CvsSyncNeeded contains some requests touching the repository, not the CVS: > * Remove ppc package of gnome-applet-sensors, version 1.4-3. This package does > not work on ppc and has been rebuilt to 1.4-4 with the appropriate ExcludeArch, > but the older broken package still exists in the ppc repo. > * Remove argus[-clients]-2.0.6.fixes1-7 builds from fc-4, fc-5, and devel; > there were errors during build, but poorly done argus makefile didn't die. I > fixed the problem in release 8, and would like 7 to go away. > * Remove gambas-*1.0.11 packages from the repos for all branches (FC-3, FC-4, > FC-5). This will resolve bugzilla 186274. > > Shouldn't these be files under FC5Status resp. FC4Status under the heading > "Remove Request" instead? Yes. > 2. CvsSyncNeeded also contained branch requests for branches already in the > repository, see: > http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-April/msg00004.html > These have been deleted with no apparent action done to the CVS. Isn't the > right way here to "cvs-import.sh -b FC-5"? Depends on what you want to achieve with that. It's fine if you choose to update a package *in an already existing branch* using cvs-import.sh. Whether it can be used for creating new branches has been asked several times, but I don't remember hearing much feedback at all. The last official word I've heard is that cvs-import.sh should not be used to create new branches, but the branches must be requested through the Wiki page instead. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 21:17:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 17:17:40 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187697] New: Review Request: zasx - Asteroid like game with powerups Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187697 Summary: Review Request: zasx - Asteroid like game with powerups Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/zasx.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/zasx-1.30-1.src.rpm Description: Shoot the asteroids before they hit your ship and collect power ups to restore your shields and improve your weapons. The game features single and dualplayer mode, joystick, music and sound. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 21:40:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 17:40:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177134] Review Request: mkvtoolnix - Matroska container utilites In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604022140.k32LeNWT015796@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mkvtoolnix - Matroska container utilites https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177134 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at greysector.net 2006-04-02 17:40 EST ------- I can't just change wxGTK2-devel to wxGTK-devel, because it'll build against gtk+-1.x on FC4. I've included a conditional BR using %{fedora}. Everything else is fixed. http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/mkvtoolnix-1.6.5-3.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 21:45:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 17:45:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177401] Review Request: clamsmtp - SMTP filter for ClamAV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604022145.k32LjGvt016409@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: clamsmtp - SMTP filter for ClamAV https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177401 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at greysector.net 2006-04-02 17:45 EST ------- Fixed. http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/clamsmtp-1.6-2.src.rpm (spec as above) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 22:03:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 18:03:10 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185606] Template file for libraries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604022203.k32M3A3J018756@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Template file for libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185606 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-02 18:02 EST ------- Slightly modified version added to CVS (the project, not the packages dir). Comments welcome. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 22:05:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 18:05:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177211] Review Request: newsx - NNTP news exchange utility In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604022205.k32M5THi018993@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: newsx - NNTP news exchange utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177211 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at greysector.net 2006-04-02 18:05 EST ------- http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/newsx.spec http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/newsx-1.6-2.src.rpm Should be fixed now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 22:07:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 18:07:11 -0400 Subject: [Bug 180066] Request: Inclusion of a ruby template file In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604022207.k32M7BKH019339@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Request: Inclusion of a ruby template file https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180066 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |REOPENED Resolution|ERRATA | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-02 18:06 EST ------- Reopening due to recent multilib related discussions/concerns on fedora-extras list. Whoever knows the status of ruby packaging in FC/FE, please let me know if the spec template could be fixed so it'd be working properly now, or if it should be just dropped from fedora-rpmdevtools for now until the rest of the ruby infrastructure in FC is ready. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 22:07:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 18:07:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177860] Review Request: libXvMCW - A Wrapper for run-time loading of XvMC libraries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604022207.k32M7xP8019419@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libXvMCW - A Wrapper for run-time loading of XvMC libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177860 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at greysector.net 2006-04-02 18:07 EST ------- This is only for FC4 and FC3. FC5 already includes that (in libXvMC). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Sun Apr 2 22:57:42 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 23:57:42 +0100 Subject: Importing to earlier versions of FC Message-ID: <1144018663.4071.25.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, Recently, I requested a number of apps to be put into FC4 and FC5 which were currently only in FC-dev. Where an application didn't have a version already there (such as the fuse-emulator), the most recent version was imported. However, anjuta had the broken 1.2.3-2 release (I think it is) imported rather than the fixed 1.2.4 branch. Should not the newest version have been imported? TTFN Paul -- "ein zu starker starker Anblick kann Sie toten. Sie gegen gerade uber den Rand mit dem festen Wissen des Wege vor Ihnen" - Linus Tordvals -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Sun Apr 2 22:59:35 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 23:59:35 +0100 Subject: apr and mod_mono Message-ID: <1144018775.4071.28.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, I'm working to get mod_mono and xps ready for inclusion into FE. The problem is that while xps works fine, mod_mono won't as apr is now called apr-1-config and the includes are in /usr/include/apr-1 instead of being called apr-config and being in /usr/include/apr. Is there a work around for this or is it something that needs putting into BZ as the package names seem incorrect? TTFN Paul -- "ein zu starker starker Anblick kann Sie toten. Sie gegen gerade uber den Rand mit dem festen Wissen des Wege vor Ihnen" - Linus Tordvals -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From wtogami at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 23:01:49 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 19:01:49 -0400 Subject: Importing to earlier versions of FC In-Reply-To: <1144018663.4071.25.camel@T7.Linux> References: <1144018663.4071.25.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <443057DD.7080001@redhat.com> Paul wrote: > Hi, > > Recently, I requested a number of apps to be put into FC4 and FC5 which > were currently only in FC-dev. Where an application didn't have a > version already there (such as the fuse-emulator), the most recent > version was imported. However, anjuta had the broken 1.2.3-2 release (I > think it is) imported rather than the fixed 1.2.4 branch. > > Should not the newest version have been imported? If the branch already exists, you are supposed to fix the contents yourself, make tag and build. Is there something unclear about this? Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 23:09:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 19:09:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177483] Review Request: subversion-api-docs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604022309.k32N9u8l027584@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: subversion-api-docs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177483 ------- Additional Comments From bojan at rexursive.com 2006-04-02 19:09 EST ------- Thanks Toshio. I'll try to remember the release number rule for next time - version numbers are cheap after all :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 2 23:19:20 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 01:19:20 +0200 Subject: Some confusion about Extras processes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060403011920.fd33c75e.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 2 Apr 2006 21:04:37 +0000 (UTC), Kevin Kofler wrote: > I've noticed that there appears to be some confusion about some of the > processes in Fedora Extras (in particular, the role of CvsSyncNeeded). Sorry if > I'm the one who is confused, but in either case, it would be nice if someone > could clear things up. > > 1. CvsSyncNeeded contains some requests touching the repository, not the CVS: > * Remove ppc package of gnome-applet-sensors, version 1.4-3. This package does > not work on ppc and has been rebuilt to 1.4-4 with the appropriate ExcludeArch, > but the older broken package still exists in the ppc repo. That does not belong in there. Maybe we should rename the CVSSyncNeeded page and make the old name link to the new name. I've edited the page a bit. That page is really only for requesting a CVS admin to perform special actions which ordinary contributors cannot do. Like creating completely new branch directories for a package in CVS or removing a CVS module beyond what "cvs remove -fR" can do. The page is also not needed at all when you want to published builds of updated packages. Just work in CVS and with the build system. Wiki is not needed. > * Remove argus[-clients]-2.0.6.fixes1-7 builds from fc-4, fc-5, and devel; > there were errors during build, but poorly done argus makefile didn't die. I > fixed the problem in release 8, and would like 7 to go away. Same here. Such requests are to be executed on the RPM package repository and have nothing to do with CVS. > * Remove gambas-*1.0.11 packages from the repos for all branches (FC-3, FC-4, > FC-5). This will resolve bugzilla 186274. Same here. Btw, the terminology is not so clear here. Look: "repos" => RPM package repositories for Yum "branches" => branch directories in CVS "FC-3", "FC-4", "FC-5" => chosen names for branches in CVS In the repository, we usually refer to "different distribution releases" and don't call FC5 a branch of FC4 or anything like that. ;) So, this request is confusing for somebody who expects requests for actions to be done in CVS. > Shouldn't these be files under FC5Status resp. FC4Status under the heading > "Remove Request" instead? (And I'm not convinced the argus -7 builds need > removal at all, -8 supercedes them anyway.) Right. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 2 23:22:57 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 01:22:57 +0200 Subject: Importing to earlier versions of FC In-Reply-To: <1144018663.4071.25.camel@T7.Linux> References: <1144018663.4071.25.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <20060403012257.a69bd2a0.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 23:57:42 +0100, Paul wrote: > Hi, > > Recently, I requested a number of apps to be put into FC4 and FC5 which > were currently only in FC-dev. Just update the directories in CVS with your changes. Look, the branches are there (for a very long time): $ cvs co anjuta For more information on using the Fedora source code repositories, please visit http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UsingCvs cvs checkout: Updating anjuta cvs checkout: Updating anjuta/FC-1 cvs checkout: Updating anjuta/FC-2 cvs checkout: Updating anjuta/FC-3 cvs checkout: Updating anjuta/FC-4 cvs checkout: Updating anjuta/FC-5 cvs checkout: Updating anjuta/RHL-9 cvs checkout: Updating anjuta/common cvs checkout: Updating anjuta/devel cvs checkout: Updating common > Where an application didn't have a > version already there (such as the fuse-emulator), the most recent > version was imported. However, anjuta had the broken 1.2.3-2 release (I > think it is) imported rather than the fixed 1.2.4 branch. > > Should not the newest version have been imported? What src.rpm did you import? And how? There has not been anyCVS activity in directory 'anjuta/FC-4'. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Sun Apr 2 23:30:03 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 00:30:03 +0100 Subject: Importing to earlier versions of FC In-Reply-To: <443057DD.7080001@redhat.com> References: <1144018663.4071.25.camel@T7.Linux> <443057DD.7080001@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1144020603.18621.9.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > > Should not the newest version have been imported? > > If the branch already exists, you are supposed to fix the contents > yourself, make tag and build. Is there something unclear about this? Right, sorry. Is the best way to resolve this problem with anjuta to request the old versions be removed (there are currently two versions in there, a really old one and an old, broken one, neither of which I have the repositories for, so can't use cvs remove) and then re-request the current version to be imported? (I was under the misapprehension that anything requested for import would be the version in FE-devel, meaning that anjuta-1.2.4 would be moved in as it's the only version in FE-devel) TTFN Paul -- "ein zu starker starker Anblick kann Sie toten. Sie gegen gerade uber den Rand mit dem festen Wissen des Wege vor Ihnen" - Linus Torvals -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From kevin.kofler at chello.at Sun Apr 2 23:37:58 2006 From: kevin.kofler at chello.at (Kevin Kofler) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 23:37:58 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Importing to earlier versions of FC References: <1144018663.4071.25.camel@T7.Linux> <443057DD.7080001@redhat.com> <1144020603.18621.9.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: > Right, sorry. Is the best way to resolve this problem with anjuta to > request the old versions be removed (there are currently two versions in > there, a really old one and an old, broken one, neither of which I have > the repositories for, so can't use cvs remove) and then re-request the > current version to be imported? No. Removing packages from anywhere is a manual process for exceptional cases (and a different one for removal from CVS or from the repository, so removing it from both needs TWO manual interventions). This is not an exceptional case, it's the common case. Kevin Kofler From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 2 23:44:48 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 01:44:48 +0200 Subject: Importing to earlier versions of FC In-Reply-To: <1144020603.18621.9.camel@T7.Linux> References: <1144018663.4071.25.camel@T7.Linux> <443057DD.7080001@redhat.com> <1144020603.18621.9.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <20060403014448.947522e7.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 00:30:03 +0100, Paul wrote: > Hi, > > > > Should not the newest version have been imported? > > > > If the branch already exists, you are supposed to fix the contents > > yourself, make tag and build. Is there something unclear about this? > > Right, sorry. Is the best way to resolve this problem with anjuta to > request the old versions be removed (there are currently two versions in > there, a really old one and an old, broken one, neither of which I have > the repositories for, so can't use cvs remove) and then re-request the > current version to be imported? The two old binary packages in the RPM repository would be upgraded once you pushed your updates to the build system. ??? What requests are you referring to? Simply check out anjuta from Fedora Extras: cvs co anjuta Then update the files in 'anjuta/FC-4' and commit your changes. Tag all files as you've done before, then send the stuff to the build system. > (I was under the misapprehension that anything requested for import > would be the version in FE-devel, meaning that anjuta-1.2.4 would be > moved in as it's the only version in FE-devel) See my comment in bugzilla. You _never_ request anything to be imported. You import things yourself. Either into "devel" or into any of the other existing branches which exist for your package in CVS: FC-5 FC-4 FC-3 and so on. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 2 23:59:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 19:59:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 167364] Review Request: Fuse emulator utilities In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604022359.k32Nxhgd002012@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Fuse emulator utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167364 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-02 19:59 EST ------- Ping : anyone want to review and approve this? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 00:02:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:02:51 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604030002.k3302pgc002412@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176542 bugs.michael at gmx.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |chabotc at xs4all.nl ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-04-02 20:02 EST ------- Next time please add a _valid_ email address in CVS owners.list, where "valid" means it is used in your bugzilla account! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 00:07:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:07:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182320] Review Request: gnome-build In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604030007.k3307OsS002984@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnome-build https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182320 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-02 20:07 EST ------- Can we move forward on this and #182319? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 3 00:22:01 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:22:01 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060403002201.A07D67FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 6 abe-1.1-2.fc5 anjuta-1.2.4-5.fc5 perl-X11-Protocol-0.55-4.fc5 python-imaging-1.1.5-2.fc5 tclhttpd-3.5.1-11.fc5 vnstat-1.4-7.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 00:16:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:16:22 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182319] Review Request: anjuta-gdl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604030016.k330GM85004118@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: anjuta-gdl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182319 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-02 20:16 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/anjuta-gdl.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/anjuta-gdl-0.6.0-3.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 3 00:22:57 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:22:57 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060403002257.3C7F17FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 3 abe-1.1-2.fc4 anjuta-1.2.4-5.fc4 python-imaging-1.1.5-2.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 00:18:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:18:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182320] Review Request: gnome-build In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604030018.k330IbLq004332@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnome-build https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182320 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-02 20:18 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/gnome-build.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/gnome-build-0.1.2-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 00:25:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:25:40 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187622] Review Request: cowbell In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604030025.k330PelF005219@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cowbell https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187622 ------- Additional Comments From foolish at guezz.net 2006-04-02 20:25 EST ------- replaced %{_libdir} with %{_prefix}/lib/ hope this will fix x86_64 build issue. Updated spec: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/cowbell.spec SRPM: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/cowbell-0.2.6.1-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 3 00:45:19 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:45:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060403004519.9B9227FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 6 abe-1.1-2.fc6 gnokii-0.6.12-3.fc6 gnokii-0.6.12-4.fc6 python-imaging-1.1.5-2.fc6 tclhttpd-3.5.1-11.fc6 vnstat-1.4-7.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 01:04:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 21:04:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187706] New: Review Request: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187706 Summary: Review Request: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: michel.salim at gmail.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://hircus.org/fedora/alsa-oss/alsa-oss.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://hircus.org/fedora/alsa-oss/alsa-oss-1.0.11-1.rc3.src.rpm Description: alsa-oss provides a library and a wrapper script for launching legacy OSS applications. Unlike the kernel OSS compatibility support, this has the advantage of supporting DMIX software mixing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 01:30:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 21:30:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 167364] Review Request: Fuse emulator utilities In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604030130.k331U7Wi014485@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Fuse emulator utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167364 ------- Additional Comments From tkmame at retrogames.com 2006-04-02 21:29 EST ------- Well, I would except 1) The link to the spec file doesnt work 2) I still cant assign myself to bugs yet 3) I am on a 64bit architecture -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 02:50:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 22:50:58 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187697] Review Request: zasx - Asteroid like game with powerups In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604030250.k332owPx032754@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zasx - Asteroid like game with powerups https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187697 ------- Additional Comments From tkmame at retrogames.com 2006-04-02 22:50 EST ------- - rpmlint output: W: zasx invalid-license GPL and freely distributable content W: zasx invalid-license GPL and freely distributable content W: zasx-debuginfo invalid-license GPL and freely distributable content readme.txt says sound effects are under Giftware license which is what allegro uses so I guess that is permissable. Other license restrictions mentioned are met. OKAY -package naming guidelines OKAY -specfile name matches base package name OKAY -package meets guidelines OKAY -package license OKAY (see above) -License field matches license Perhaps you should mention Giftware license in License tag -license text included in %doc OKAY -spec file in english OKAY -spec file legible OKAY -md5sums match 8706050ad5e54b673c2e2a987c581d67 zasx130s.zip -successfully compiles and builds on x86_64 FC5 OKAY -package contains no unnecessary BR OKAY -all build dependencies are met in BR OKAY -no locales OKAY -package does not conain libraries OKAY -package is not relocatable OKAY -package does not create directories OKAY -package does not conatin duplicate files OKAY -permissions on files set correctly OKAY -%clean removes buildroot OKAY -spec file has consistant use of macros OKAY -package contains permissible content OKAY -package documentation is not large enough to warrent a -docs package OKAY -files in %doc do not affect runtime OKAY -package does not contain anything that should go in -devel OKAY -package includes .desktop entry which meet guidelines OKAY -package does not own files or directories owned by other packages OKAY Everything looks good, except perhaps you should mention Giftware in the License field. I'd assign myself to this bug and move it to FE-REVIEW, but I still can't do that. :( -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at drussell.dnsalias.com Mon Apr 3 03:51:13 2006 From: bugzilla at drussell.dnsalias.com (Don Russell) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 20:51:13 -0700 Subject: new package request Message-ID: <44309BB1.6070403@drussell.dnsalias.com> I installed Fedora Core 5, including httpd (Apache) and mySQL.... I can't find any rpms for phpMyAdmin. Since the web server and the mySQL database are shipped with FC, I'd like to cast a vote for getting a package of phpMyAdmin in Extras. What is the proper place/procedure to request a new package? Thanks, Don From mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 3 03:54:42 2006 From: mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org (Mike McGrath) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 22:54:42 -0500 Subject: new package request In-Reply-To: <44309BB1.6070403@drussell.dnsalias.com> References: <44309BB1.6070403@drussell.dnsalias.com> Message-ID: <3237e4410604022054m4182c11ck372ff3fd3290ee3c@mail.gmail.com> On 4/2/06, Don Russell wrote: > I installed Fedora Core 5, including httpd (Apache) and mySQL.... I > can't find any rpms for phpMyAdmin. > > Since the web server and the mySQL database are shipped with FC, I'd > like to cast a vote for getting a package of phpMyAdmin in Extras. > > What is the proper place/procedure to request a new package? > > Thanks, > Don > Place it on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/WishList I've actually been meaning to package this so I'll try to get off my butt and do it. -Mike From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 03:51:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 23:51:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187706] Review Request: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604030351.k333pUmN008907@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187706 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-04-02 23:51 EST ------- Just out of curiosity, what's the difference between using this and having the pcm.!default target in asound.conf? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at drussell.dnsalias.com Mon Apr 3 04:16:27 2006 From: bugzilla at drussell.dnsalias.com (Don Russell) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 21:16:27 -0700 Subject: new package request In-Reply-To: <3237e4410604022054m4182c11ck372ff3fd3290ee3c@mail.gmail.com> References: <44309BB1.6070403@drussell.dnsalias.com> <3237e4410604022054m4182c11ck372ff3fd3290ee3c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4430A19B.5020800@drussell.dnsalias.com> Mike McGrath wrote: > On 4/2/06, Don Russell wrote: > >> I installed Fedora Core 5, including httpd (Apache) and mySQL.... I >> can't find any rpms for phpMyAdmin. >> >> Since the web server and the mySQL database are shipped with FC, I'd >> like to cast a vote for getting a package of phpMyAdmin in Extras. >> >> What is the proper place/procedure to request a new package? >> >> Thanks, >> Don >> >> > > Place it on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/WishList I've > actually been meaning to package this so I'll try to get off my butt > and do it. > > -Mike Thanks Mike... but *what" do I place there? I don't actually *have* anything other than the gzip file available at http://www.phpmyadmin.net And *how* to I put something there? I couldn't find a link to anything where I could add a comment/make a request... I'm trying to install phpMyAdmin 2.8.0.2 manually.... but that's going so well, I thought I'd take a break and see what it takes to request it be added to Extras. :-) Don From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 04:44:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 00:44:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187706] Review Request: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604030444.k334ivVr017310@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187706 ------- Additional Comments From bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info 2006-04-03 00:44 EST ------- And, BTW, alsa-oss was dropped from Extras long. See http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2005-May/msg00619.html Is there really a *good* reason to bring it back? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 05:35:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 01:35:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604030535.k335ZQcb024075@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176542 ------- Additional Comments From toth_bandi at users.sourceforge.net 2006-04-03 01:35 EST ------- Why the toth_bandi at users.sourceforge.net isn't valid e-mail address? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 05:38:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 01:38:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187697] Review Request: zasx - Asteroid like game with powerups In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604030538.k335crLk024758@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zasx - Asteroid like game with powerups https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187697 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |tkmame at retrogames.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-03 01:38 EST ------- Thanks for the review. (In reply to comment #1) > -License field matches license > > Perhaps you should mention Giftware license in License tag > I don't want to clutter up the License field any more then I already had to, but if that is what it takes for you to approve it I'll add it :) > Everything looks good, except perhaps you should mention Giftware in the License > field. > See above. > I'd assign myself to this bug and move it to FE-REVIEW, but I still can't do > that. :( I believe you can change the blocker bugs, or .... ? Anyways setting blocking to FE-REVIEW and assigning to you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 06:19:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 02:19:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187433] Review Request: acx-kmod - Open ACX100/ACX111 wireless NIC driver In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604030619.k336JTtI029902@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: acx-kmod - Open ACX100/ACX111 wireless NIC driver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187433 ------- Additional Comments From seg at haxxed.com 2006-04-03 02:19 EST ------- Note that D-Link Deutschland GmbH has apparently given unlimited distribution rights to their ACX1xx firmware. This would seem to meet the Fedora binary firmware packaging guidelines. http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/01/msg00989.html http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-adf31c383612aac313719f7b4f8167b7dcf245d2 With the small snag that I can't figure out exactly what firmware this covers, or the full original message that gives the permission. I guess this means you can just download the windows drivers from D-Link and pull the firmware files out. As far as what firmware you need for which chip: http://acx100.sourceforge.net/wiki/Firmware -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 07:40:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 03:40:27 -0400 Subject: [Bug 167364] Review Request: Fuse emulator utilities In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604030740.k337eRLK010771@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Fuse emulator utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167364 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-03 03:40 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/fuse-emulator-utils.spec I can't comment on (2), but it should be fine with 64 bit, afterall, that's what I'm using! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 08:14:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 04:14:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187697] Review Request: zasx - Asteroid like game with powerups In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604030814.k338ECCq015901@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zasx - Asteroid like game with powerups https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187697 tkmame at retrogames.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tkmame at retrogames.com 2006-04-03 04:13 EST ------- Giftware in license isn't a blocker so I'll leave it up to your discretion. **APPROVED** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 08:43:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 04:43:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604030843.k338hT5T021683@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176542 ------- Additional Comments From toth_bandi at users.sourceforge.net 2006-04-03 04:43 EST ------- Okay. I tested this address and really it isn't working. The problem is the mail system of sourceforge.net. I am waiting any times and if it is necessary I shall change e-mail address... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 12:14:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 08:14:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182941] Review Request: nessus-core Network vulnerability scanner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031214.k33CEkgR025779@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nessus-core Network vulnerability scanner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182941 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-04-03 08:14 EST ------- Hm did you setup up the plugin directory correctly? Did you install the plugins? Here is a version with the stuff you mentioned fixed. http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/nessus-core-2.2.6-3.src.rpm http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/nessus-core.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 12:45:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 08:45:50 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172871] Review Request: driftnet In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031245.k33Cjova031952@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: driftnet https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172871 bnocera at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE ------- Additional Comments From bnocera at redhat.com 2006-04-03 08:45 EST ------- Pushed to CVS in devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 12:47:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 08:47:51 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031247.k33Clpjx032309@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176542 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-04-03 08:47 EST ------- > Why the toth_bandi at users.sourceforge.net isn't valid e-mail address? You added a different address to owners.list: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-commits/2006-April/msg00137.html https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-commits/2006-April/msg00138.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From mfleming at enlartenment.com Mon Apr 3 13:06:48 2006 From: mfleming at enlartenment.com (Michael Fleming) Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 23:06:48 +1000 Subject: new package request In-Reply-To: <4430A19B.5020800@drussell.dnsalias.com> References: <44309BB1.6070403@drussell.dnsalias.com> <3237e4410604022054m4182c11ck372ff3fd3290ee3c@mail.gmail.com> <4430A19B.5020800@drussell.dnsalias.com> Message-ID: <1144069609.9542.7.camel@defender.antaresenterprises.lan> On Sun, 2006-04-02 at 21:16 -0700, Don Russell wrote: > Mike McGrath wrote: > > On 4/2/06, Don Russell wrote: > > > >> I installed Fedora Core 5, including httpd (Apache) and mySQL.... I > >> can't find any rpms for phpMyAdmin. > >> > > > > Place it on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/WishList I've > > actually been meaning to package this so I'll try to get off my butt > > and do it. > > > > -Mike > > Thanks Mike... but *what" do I place there? I don't actually *have* > anything other than the gzip file available at http://www.phpmyadmin.net > > And *how* to I put something there? I couldn't find a link to anything > where I could add a comment/make a request... > > I'm trying to install phpMyAdmin 2.8.0.2 manually.... but that's going > so well, I thought I'd take a break and see what it takes to request it > be added to Extras. :-) Somewhat off topic, but this has led me to get off my arse and update my own phpmyadmin package - have a wander over to http://www.enlartenment.com/packages/fedora/5/x86_64/repodata/repoview/phpmyadmin-0-2.8.0.2-1.fc5.mf.html (actually a noarch package that should install anywhere, also in FC4/i386 repo flavour :-) It's certainly not ready for Extras though and more a quick whip-up. Poke me enough and I'll give it more work though :-P > Don Michael. -- Michael Fleming "Bother" said the Borg, "We've assimilated Pooh!" From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 13:13:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 09:13:15 -0400 Subject: [Bug 90133] Review Request: rss-glx -- Really Slick Screensavers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031313.k33DDFSd004266@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rss-glx -- Really Slick Screensavers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90133 ------- Additional Comments From nphilipp at redhat.com 2006-04-03 09:13 EST ------- I've put the new build requirement in, files can be found at: SRPM: http://tiptoe.de/dav/rss-glx-0.8.1-0.2.src.rpm SPEC: http://tiptoe.de/dav/rss-glx.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 13:44:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 09:44:13 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186566] Review Request: bsdiff - binary diff/patch utility In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031344.k33DiDda010674@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bsdiff - binary diff/patch utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186566 jnovy at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO ------- Additional Comments From jnovy at redhat.com 2006-04-03 09:44 EST ------- ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 3 14:06:28 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 10:06:28 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060403140628.BFA567FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 4 ebtables-2.0.8-0.5.rc1.fc3 kile-1.9-1.fc3 wine-0.9.11-1.fc3 wine-docs-0.9.11-1.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 14:01:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 10:01:10 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031401.k33E1AYD013969@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 ------- Additional Comments From bnocera at redhat.com 2006-04-03 10:00 EST ------- Should be available again. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 3 14:07:30 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 10:07:30 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060403140730.891697FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 6 ebtables-2.0.8-0.5.rc1.fc4 jabberd-2.0-0.s11.9.fc4 kile-1.9-1.fc4 mediawiki-1.5.8-1.fc4 wine-0.9.11-1.fc4 wine-docs-0.9.11-0.1.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 3 14:07:58 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 10:07:58 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060403140758.63BB37FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 8 ebtables-2.0.8-0.5.rc1.fc5 fluxbox-0.9.15-2.fc5 jabberd-2.0-0.s11.9.fc5 kile-1.9-1.fc5 mediawiki-1.5.8-1.fc5 muine-0.8.4-7.fc5 wine-0.9.11-1.fc5 wine-docs-0.9.11-1.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 3 14:10:04 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 10:10:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060403141004.D1F907FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 11 driftnet-0.1.6-9 ebtables-2.0.8-0.5.rc1.fc6 fluxbox-0.9.15-2.fc6 gjots2-2.3.4-4.fc6 jabberd-2.0-0.s11.9.fc6 kile-1.9-1.fc6 mediawiki-1.5.8-1.fc6 muine-0.8.4-7.fc6 pam_mount-0.13.0-2 wine-0.9.11-1.fc6 wine-docs-0.9.11-1.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 14:49:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 10:49:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179852] /dev/std* missing in mock - FE buildsystem In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031449.k33EnL0i028167@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: /dev/std* missing in mock - FE buildsystem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179852 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-04-03 10:48 EST ------- > The following symlinks show up in /dev but they are pointing to the > /proc/self/fd stuff which doesn't exist: > fd, stderr, stdin, stdout Pardon? Is /proc not mounted inside the chroot at all? [...] FC-4 buildsys is still lacking /dev/stdin: http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-4-extras/7170-wine-docs-0.9.11-0.1.fc4/noarch/build.log The ugly hack in the wine-docs package is still enabled in order to get a successful build for FC-4. What would happen inside the strace if the buildsys created /dev/stdin? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 14:55:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 10:55:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172872] Review Request: sloccount In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031455.k33EtsYY030413@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sloccount https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172872 ------- Additional Comments From bnocera at redhat.com 2006-04-03 10:55 EST ------- Updated packages at: http://files.hadess.net/redhat/perso/spec/sloccount.spec and http://files.hadess.net/redhat/perso/source/sloccount-2.26-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 16:21:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 12:21:13 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185407] Review Request: pwgen - Automatic password generation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031621.k33GLDnM019087@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pwgen - Automatic password generation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185407 jbowes at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From jbowes at redhat.com 2006-04-03 12:21 EST ------- Thanks for all the help! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From florin at andrei.myip.org Mon Apr 3 16:40:58 2006 From: florin at andrei.myip.org (Florin Andrei) Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 09:40:58 -0700 Subject: cpuid Message-ID: <1144082458.2372.6.camel@rivendell.home.local> Nice project that doesn't appear to be in Extras: http://www.etallen.com/ "cpuid dumps detailed information about the CPU(s) gathered from the CPUID instruction, and also determines the exact model of CPU(s)." -- Florin Andrei http://florin.myip.org/ From davej at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 16:54:39 2006 From: davej at redhat.com (Dave Jones) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 11:54:39 -0500 Subject: cpuid In-Reply-To: <1144082458.2372.6.camel@rivendell.home.local> References: <1144082458.2372.6.camel@rivendell.home.local> Message-ID: <20060403165439.GB3699@redhat.com> On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 09:40:58AM -0700, Florin Andrei wrote: > Nice project that doesn't appear to be in Extras: > > http://www.etallen.com/ > > "cpuid dumps detailed information about the CPU(s) gathered from the > CPUID instruction, and also determines the exact model of CPU(s)." Should it be? It doesn't seem to offer any functionality that x86info doesn't already have. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 16:54:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 12:54:02 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175630] Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031654.k33Gs2Kk026947@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175630 Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |http://people.atrpms.net/~at | |himm/fedorasubmit/smart- | |0.41-28.src.rpm ------- Additional Comments From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net 2006-04-03 12:53 EST ------- In reply to Ville Skytt?'s comments in PM: * Sun Apr 02 2006 Axel Thimm - 0.41-28 - Move usermode support to the gui package. - Add cluster/gfs *-kernel variants. The new package is available here: http://people.atrpms.net/~athimm/fedorasubmit/smart-0.41-28.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 17:08:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 13:08:02 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187797] New: Review Request: perl-IO-Interface - Perl extension for accessing network card configuration information Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187797 Summary: Review Request: perl-IO-Interface - Perl extension for accessing network card configuration information Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: jpo at di.uminho.pt QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-IO-Interface.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-IO-Interface-0.98-1.src.rpm Description: IO::Interface adds methods to IO::Socket objects that allows them to be used to retrieve and change information about the network interfaces on your system. In addition to the object-oriented access methods, you can use a function-oriented style. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 17:12:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 13:12:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187799] New: Review Request: perl-Cairo - Perl interface to the cairo library Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187799 Summary: Review Request: perl-Cairo - Perl interface to the cairo library Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: jpo at di.uminho.pt QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-Cairo.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-Cairo-0.03-1.src.rpm Description: Cairo provides Perl bindings for the vector graphics library cairo. It supports multiple output targets, including the X Window Systems, PDF, and PNG. Cairo produces identical output on all those targets and makes use of hardware acceleration wherever possible. Note: This module may be used by latest version of perl-Gtk2 (distro >= FC-5) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 17:17:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 13:17:50 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187552] Review Request: perl-Taint-Runtime: Runtime enable taint checking In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031717.k33HHoUU031873@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Taint-Runtime: Runtime enable taint checking https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187552 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-04-03 13:17 EST ------- Closing. Already built for FC-4, FC-5, and devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 17:37:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 13:37:01 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172872] Review Request: sloccount In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031737.k33Hb1FP003446@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sloccount https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172872 ed at eh3.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |ed at eh3.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-04-03 13:36 EST ------- Hi Bastien, The above SRPM URL gave a 404 but I found the "-2" rev which I assume you meant to reference in the first place. 36397816454626ed4abc11afc66783aaec01f444 sloccount-2.26-2.src.rpm good: - source matches upstream - builds on FC4 i386 (still waiting on the mock build...) - rpmlint OK -- no warnings or errors - name OK - license is OK and correctly included - spec-file is clean and simple (although it might be nice to use "%setup -q" but thats just a suggestion!) - no shared libs - dir ownership and permissions OK very minor nit: - the description could be shortened a bit and the text better formatted -- but thats not a blocker Its taking me a while to get a mock build and I think its due to a slow network connection. As soon as I get a clean mock build, I'll approve the package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at drussell.dnsalias.com Mon Apr 3 18:08:13 2006 From: bugzilla at drussell.dnsalias.com (Don Russell) Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:08:13 -0700 Subject: new package request In-Reply-To: <1144069609.9542.7.camel@defender.antaresenterprises.lan> References: <44309BB1.6070403@drussell.dnsalias.com> <3237e4410604022054m4182c11ck372ff3fd3290ee3c@mail.gmail.com> <4430A19B.5020800@drussell.dnsalias.com> <1144069609.9542.7.camel@defender.antaresenterprises.lan> Message-ID: <4431648D.6050809@drussell.dnsalias.com> Michael Fleming wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-02 at 21:16 -0700, Don Russell wrote: > >> Mike McGrath wrote: >> >>> On 4/2/06, Don Russell wrote: >>> >>> >>>> I installed Fedora Core 5, including httpd (Apache) and mySQL.... I >>>> can't find any rpms for phpMyAdmin. >>>> > > > > >>>> >>>> >>> Place it on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/WishList I've >>> actually been meaning to package this so I'll try to get off my butt >>> and do it. >>> >>> -Mike >>> >> Thanks Mike... but *what" do I place there? I don't actually *have* >> anything other than the gzip file available at http://www.phpmyadmin.net >> >> And *how* to I put something there? I couldn't find a link to anything >> where I could add a comment/make a request... >> >> I'm trying to install phpMyAdmin 2.8.0.2 manually.... but that's going >> so well, I thought I'd take a break and see what it takes to request it >> be added to Extras. :-) >> > > Somewhat off topic, but this has led me to get off my arse and update my > own phpmyadmin package - have a wander over to > http://www.enlartenment.com/packages/fedora/5/x86_64/repodata/repoview/phpmyadmin-0-2.8.0.2-1.fc5.mf.html > (actually a noarch package that should install anywhere, also in > FC4/i386 repo flavour :-) > > It's certainly not ready for Extras though and more a quick whip-up. > Poke me enough and I'll give it more work though :-P OK... I went to your web page and d/l the rpm.... a couple of observations: Your page says the file is 11.59MBytes, but I get an actual size of: Length: 3,752,535 (3.6M) What time zone are you in? Changelog date says Tue 4 Apr 2006 08:00:00 Right now it is Mon 3 Apr 2006 18:05 UTC I'll try to get to your rpm today and give you some feedback. Don From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 18:22:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 14:22:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187809] New: Review Request: perl-GSSAPI - Perl extension providing access to the GSSAPIv2 library Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187809 Summary: Review Request: perl-GSSAPI - Perl extension providing access to the GSSAPIv2 library Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: jpo at di.uminho.pt QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-GSSAPI.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-GSSAPI-0.20-1.src.rpm Description: This module gives access to the routines of the GSSAPI library, as described in rfc2743 and rfc2744 and implemented by the Kerberos-1.2 distribution from MIT. Note: This perl module is a new requirement of Authen::SASL 2.10. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 18:23:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 14:23:13 -0400 Subject: [Bug 184291] Review Request: gnokii - a mobile telephone manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031823.k33INDiA012499@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnokii - a mobile telephone manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184291 triad at df.lth.se changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-04-03 14:23 EST ------- OK built and released for FC-4, FC-5 and devel. Thanks for your time, Ville, but I hope you will keep an eye on the package in the future too! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 18:24:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 14:24:35 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172872] Review Request: sloccount In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031824.k33IOZKl012851@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sloccount https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172872 ed at eh3.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-04-03 14:24 EST ------- [note: the above was an sha1sum] Builds in mock on FC4 i386. Ran OK on some simple tests. APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 18:50:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 14:50:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 180066] Request: Inclusion of a ruby template file In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031850.k33Iohv6020483@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Request: Inclusion of a ruby template file https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180066 ------- Additional Comments From dlutter at redhat.com 2006-04-03 14:50 EST ------- The multilib issue is being tracked as bz184199; not much progress has been made on actually fixing it so far. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 19:17:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 15:17:04 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187818] New: Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187818 Summary: Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: roland.wolters at gmx.net QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.personal.uni-jena.de/~p1woro/fedorarpms/ktorrent.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.personal.uni-jena.de/~p1woro/fedorarpms/ktorrent-1.2-1.src.rpm Description: I finished packaging ktorrent and would appreciate a review so that it can find its way into fedora extras. Ktorrent is a KDE-integrated GUI for bittorrent. It features, among other things, upnp support, udp trackers and speed capping. More information can be found at http://ktorrent.pwsp.net/ . -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 19:36:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 15:36:41 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187828] New: Review Request: log4net - A tool to output log statements to a variety of output targets Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187828 Summary: Review Request: log4net - A tool to output log statements to a variety of output targets Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: ch.nolte at fh-wolfenbuettel.de QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.noltec.org/open-source/ifolder3/log4net.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.noltec.org/open-source/ifolder3/log4net-1.2.9-1.src.rpm Description: log4net is a port of the excellent log4j framework to the .NET runtime. The framework is kept similar in spirit to the original log4j while taking advantage of new features in the .NET runtime. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 19:42:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 15:42:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187830] New: xchat-gnome crashes when notifications plug-in is enabled. Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187830 Summary: xchat-gnome crashes when notifications plug-in is enabled. Product: Fedora Extras Version: fc5 Platform: i386 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: high Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: gantrix at cox.net QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Description of problem: xchat-gnome crashes when the notification plugin is enabled. This has also been submitted as a bug to the xchat-gnome project. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=336949 After reviewing this with some of the xchat-gnome developers, I believe this to be a dependancy problem. Fedora Core 5 comes with libnotify-0.3.0-6 and Fedora Extras 5 comes with xchat-gnome-0.10-5. According to the xchat-gnome developers xchat-gnome 0.10 requires libnotify-0.3.2. In fact, they say it can't even be built with 0.3.0. This is very likely the cause of the crashes that I experience with the notification pluggin enabled. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Fedora Core release 5 (Bordeaux) How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 19:45:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 15:45:50 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187818] Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604031945.k33JjoKx002475@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187818 rdieter at math.unl.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rdieter at math.unl.edu ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-03 15:45 EST ------- Off the top of my head: * use --vendor='' instead of --vendor="fedora", as the .desktop file already has a vendor of 'kde' * See "GTK+ icon cache" in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ScriptletSnippets * If the .desktop file contains a MimeType= entry, see "desktop-database" on same ScriptletSnippets page. * See "Exclusion of Static Libraries" on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines regarding libtool archives. In short, you want to delete/omit %{_libdir}/lib*.la * The %{_libdir}/kde3/* bits should be in the main pkg, not -devel * actually, since the only thing that's going to end up in -devel is %{_libdir}/lib*.so, there's probably not much point in even making a -devel subpkg. Might as well fold everything into the main pkg. * Not much point in including %doc INSTALL Since that's (usually) talks about compiling/building, and installing from source, which isn't relevent here. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 20:04:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 16:04:22 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178901] Review Request: gtksourceview-sharp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604032004.k33K4MtO007368@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gtksourceview-sharp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178901 ------- Additional Comments From anmar at gmx.net 2006-04-03 16:04 EST ------- #7 if gtk-sharp2-gapi is installed that error disappears (missing dep?). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 20:05:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 16:05:47 -0400 Subject: [Bug 180066] Request: Inclusion of a ruby template file In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604032005.k33K5lxF007804@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Request: Inclusion of a ruby template file https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180066 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- BugsThisDependsOn| |184199 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-03 16:05 EST ------- Ok, thanks. Unless a solution is available by the time the next fedora-rpmdevtools release is due (for which I have currently no hurry for), I'll disable the ruby template. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 20:15:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 16:15:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187830] xchat-gnome crashes when notifications plug-in is enabled. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604032015.k33KFq4L010439@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: xchat-gnome crashes when notifications plug-in is enabled. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187830 bdpepple at ameritech.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|high |normal ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-04-03 16:15 EST ------- This is due to the dbus plugin (XChat-Gnome Remote Access) not being activated. To prevent this from happening to other users, if the OSD plugin is selected, it should also activate the dbus plugin. Once I get some free time, I look to see how hard it would be to implement this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 20:16:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 16:16:10 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178901] Review Request: gtksourceview-sharp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604032016.k33KGA57010605@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gtksourceview-sharp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178901 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-03 16:15 EST ------- Nope. It was down to the version of mono I was compiling with was bawked. It seems to build happily, though I am going to do some more tests tonight. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 20:24:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 16:24:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177275] Review Request: perl-AnyData: Easy access to data in many formats In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604032024.k33KOaTK012268@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-AnyData: Easy access to data in many formats https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177275 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-04-03 16:24 EST ------- Review for release 2: * RPM name is OK * Source AnyData-0.10.tar.gz is the same as upstream * Builds fine in mock * rpmlint of perl-AnyData looks OK * File list of perl-AnyData looks OK APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 20:27:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 16:27:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187697] Review Request: zasx - Asteroid like game with powerups In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604032027.k33KRqD7013235@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zasx - Asteroid like game with powerups https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187697 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-03 16:27 EST ------- Thanks, imported & build. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Mon Apr 3 20:36:58 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 22:36:58 +0200 Subject: Taking ownership of gtkterm. In-Reply-To: <1143964220.3403.8.camel@eagle.danny.cz> References: <442D90A5.6010901@hhs.nl> <1143964220.3403.8.camel@eagle.danny.cz> Message-ID: <4431876A.9020706@hhs.nl> Dan Hor?k wrote: > Hans de Goede p??e v P? 31. 03. 2006 v 22:27 +0200: >> Hi, >> >> About 24 hours ago I've asked if there was any objection if I would >> pickup gtkterm, no one objected so I'm taking it. I now this is a bit >> quick, but I took a look and have a new version ready so this time is as >> good as any. > > As I see in the build reports, gtkterm is built for FC5 and devel. Is it > possible to built it also for FC4? > > Its already build for FC-4, but assume you mean build the latest version. Thats not exactly my habbit (I need to think about howto handle this* one of these days). But I've synced FC-4 with 5 and devel and requested a build for you :) Regards, Hans * This = When doing (minor?) updates to a newer FE-release and/or devel do I also push this for older FE releases. I believe this is what most others do maybe we need to make this policy for minor updates. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 20:40:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 16:40:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186264] Review Request: bcm43xx-fwcutter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604032040.k33KeKTu017452@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bcm43xx-fwcutter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186264 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-03 16:40 EST ------- Looks better now, thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 20:57:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 16:57:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187843] New: Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187843 Summary: Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: imlinux at gmail.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/phpMyAdmin/phpMyAdmin.spec SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/phpMyAdmin/phpMyAdmin-2.8.0.2-1.src.rpm Description: phpmyadmin is a web based MySQL management tool. It allows users to use and administer a MySQL instance. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 21:06:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 17:06:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187845] New: Review Request:
Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187845 Summary: Review Request:
Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: redhat at flyn.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://flyn.org/SRPMS/pam_keyring.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://flyn.org/SRPMS/pam_keyring-0.0.7-1.src.rpm Description: The pam_keyring module allows GNOME users to automatically unlock their default keyring using their system password when they log in. This allows the data in the default keyring to be used more transparently. Ideally, users should only every have to enter one password (or physical token, etc.): the password they use to authenticate themselves to the system when they log in. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 21:06:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 17:06:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187846] New: Review Request: pam_keyring Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187846 Summary: Review Request: pam_keyring Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: redhat at flyn.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://flyn.org/SRPMS/pam_keyring.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://flyn.org/SRPMS/pam_keyring-0.0.7-1.src.rpm Description: The pam_keyring module allows GNOME users to automatically unlock their default keyring using their system password when they log in. This allows the data in the default keyring to be used more transparently. Ideally, users should only every have to enter one password (or physical token, etc.): the password they use to authenticate themselves to the system when they log in. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From wart at kobold.org Mon Apr 3 21:14:14 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Michael Thomas) Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 14:14:14 -0700 Subject: Taking ownership of gtkterm. In-Reply-To: <4431876A.9020706@hhs.nl> References: <442D90A5.6010901@hhs.nl> <1143964220.3403.8.camel@eagle.danny.cz> <4431876A.9020706@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <44319026.3050402@kobold.org> Hans de Goede wrote: > Dan Hor?k wrote: >> Hans de Goede p??e v P? 31. 03. 2006 v 22:27 +0200: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> About 24 hours ago I've asked if there was any objection if I would >>> pickup gtkterm, no one objected so I'm taking it. I now this is a bit >>> quick, but I took a look and have a new version ready so this time is >>> as good as any. >> >> >> As I see in the build reports, gtkterm is built for FC5 and devel. Is it >> possible to built it also for FC4? >> >> > > Its already build for FC-4, but assume you mean build the latest > version. Thats not exactly my habbit (I need to think about howto handle > this* one of these days). But I've synced FC-4 with 5 and devel and > requested a build for you :) > > Regards, > > Hans > > * This = When doing (minor?) updates to a newer FE-release and/or devel > do I also push this for older FE releases. I believe this is what most > others do maybe we need to make this policy for minor updates. IMO, it's up to the maintainer whether they want to push updates to older releases. Ideally these updates would be validated on the older releases before being pushed, and not all maintainers have the resources to test on all releases and architectures. If the maintainer can find someone with access to the other releases/architectures who is willing to validate an update then that will make the job easier. If we were to have a written policy, I would recommend this: "Maintainers are only required to push updates to devel. The decision to backport updates to other branches is left to the maintainer." --Mike -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3820 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 3 21:15:44 2006 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 02:45:44 +0530 Subject: 855resolution package Message-ID: <1144098944.24151.30.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> Hi I heard someone raving about this one - 855resolution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187221 Maybe someone wants to package it for Fedora Extras? Rahul From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 21:10:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 17:10:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187845] Review Request:
In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604032110.k33LArhv024141@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187845 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request:
|package name here> Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE OtherBugsDependingO|163776 | nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-03 17:10 EST ------- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 187846 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 21:11:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 17:11:05 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187846] Review Request: pam_keyring In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604032111.k33LB5g8024244@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pam_keyring https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187846 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-03 17:11 EST ------- *** Bug 187845 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From gemi at bluewin.ch Mon Apr 3 21:30:31 2006 From: gemi at bluewin.ch (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard?= Milmeister) Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 23:30:31 +0200 Subject: How to make SELinux file context permanent? Message-ID: <1144099832.7174.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> I have two packages, gcl and ecl, lisp compilers, that need a context change of some binaries from system_u:object_r:lib_t to system_u:object_r:textrel_shlib_t These files reside in subdirectories of /usr/lib. Is it possible to set context during RPM creation? In any case, the changes are not permament, because after a relabeling (or restorecon) of the filesystem, the context reverts to the default. What is the least painless way to do this correctly? -- G?rard Milmeister Langackerstrasse 49 CH-8057 Z?rich From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 21:25:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 17:25:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177276] Review Request: perl-DBD-AnyData : DBI access to XML, CSV and other formats In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604032125.k33LPsv5027873@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-DBD-AnyData : DBI access to XML, CSV and other formats https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177276 Bug 177276 depends on bug 177275, which changed state. Bug 177275 Summary: Review Request: perl-AnyData: Easy access to data in many formats https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177275 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From i.pilcher at comcast.net Mon Apr 3 21:37:12 2006 From: i.pilcher at comcast.net (Ian Pilcher) Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 16:37:12 -0500 Subject: How to make SELinux file context permanent? In-Reply-To: <1144099832.7174.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> References: <1144099832.7174.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: G?rard Milmeister wrote: > I have two packages, gcl and ecl, lisp compilers, that > need a context change of some binaries from > system_u:object_r:lib_t > to > system_u:object_r:textrel_shlib_t > These files reside in subdirectories of /usr/lib. Is it > possible to set context during RPM creation? > In any case, the changes are not permament, because after > a relabeling (or restorecon) of the filesystem, the context > reverts to the default. > What is the least painless way to do this correctly? Call semanage in your %post script. -- ======================================================================== Ian Pilcher i.pilcher at comcast.net ======================================================================== From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Mon Apr 3 21:38:59 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 23:38:59 +0200 Subject: Taking ownership of gtkterm. In-Reply-To: <44319026.3050402@kobold.org> References: <442D90A5.6010901@hhs.nl> <1143964220.3403.8.camel@eagle.danny.cz> <4431876A.9020706@hhs.nl> <44319026.3050402@kobold.org> Message-ID: <443195F3.1010109@hhs.nl> Michael Thomas wrote: > > IMO, it's up to the maintainer whether they want to push updates to > older releases. Ideally these updates would be validated on the older > releases before being pushed, and not all maintainers have the resources > to test on all releases and architectures. If the maintainer can find > someone with access to the other releases/architectures who is willing > to validate an update then that will make the job easier. > Good point > If we were to have a written policy, I would recommend this: > > "Maintainers are only required to push updates to devel. The decision > to backport updates to other branches is left to the maintainer." > Which is effectivly which we have now. Currently many maintainers push out updates to all not EOL FE releases (assuming the update doesn't have any unmet deps and doesn't cause any dep troubles) I can kinda see the logic in this too, assuming most bugs are in a package itself and not in deps or the toolchain, this means that the maintainer will have the same version of the package as any bug reporters even though he may be on another release. However if most maintainers do this then users might start expecting always having the newest release available from maintainers who don't do this hence some standardisation might be good, the again I'm all for freedom and against unnescesarry rules, so as always I'm divided :) Regards, Hans > --Mike > From gemi at bluewin.ch Mon Apr 3 21:44:24 2006 From: gemi at bluewin.ch (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard?= Milmeister) Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 23:44:24 +0200 Subject: How to make SELinux file context permanent? In-Reply-To: References: <1144099832.7174.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: <1144100664.7174.6.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 16:37 -0500, Ian Pilcher wrote: > G?rard Milmeister wrote: > > I have two packages, gcl and ecl, lisp compilers, that > > need a context change of some binaries from > > system_u:object_r:lib_t > > to > > system_u:object_r:textrel_shlib_t > > These files reside in subdirectories of /usr/lib. Is it > > possible to set context during RPM creation? > > In any case, the changes are not permament, because after > > a relabeling (or restorecon) of the filesystem, the context > > reverts to the default. > > What is the least painless way to do this correctly? > > Call semanage in your %post script. Ehm, can you be a bit more specific. The above is as far as I get in understanding SELinux :-) -- G?rard Milmeister Langackerstrasse 49 CH-8057 Z?rich From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 21:41:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 17:41:02 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178901] Review Request: gtksourceview-sharp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604032141.k33Lf2OG031657@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gtksourceview-sharp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178901 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-03 17:40 EST ------- Updated spec Spec Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/gtksourceview-sharp.spec Added additional buildreq (gtk-sharp2-gapi) and a couple of requires. Builds fine on an x86_64 and i386 box. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 3 22:06:14 2006 From: mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org (Mike McGrath) Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 17:06:14 -0500 Subject: How to make SELinux file context permanent? In-Reply-To: <1144100664.7174.6.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> References: <1144099832.7174.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> <1144100664.7174.6.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: <44319C56.6090000@fedoraproject.org> G?rard Milmeister wrote: >> Call semanage in your %post script. >> In the past I've created a bug for the selinux people to have it added to the master context list. -Mike From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 22:09:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 18:09:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175127] Review Request: wavbreaker - Tool for splitting .wav files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604032209.k33M9b47005741@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wavbreaker - Tool for splitting .wav files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175127 ------- Additional Comments From dmaley at redhat.com 2006-04-03 18:09 EST ------- OK thanks, wasn't sure the proper way to do that so I appreciate the info. An updated SRPM and SPEC available from the usual locations: SPEC: http://homer.homelinux.net/RPMS/wavbreaker.spec SRPM: http://homer.homelinux.net/RPMS/wavbreaker-0.7-3.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From mfleming at enlartenment.com Mon Apr 3 22:47:54 2006 From: mfleming at enlartenment.com (Michael Fleming) Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 08:47:54 +1000 Subject: new package request In-Reply-To: <4431648D.6050809@drussell.dnsalias.com> References: <44309BB1.6070403@drussell.dnsalias.com> <3237e4410604022054m4182c11ck372ff3fd3290ee3c@mail.gmail.com> <4430A19B.5020800@drussell.dnsalias.com> <1144069609.9542.7.camel@defender.antaresenterprises.lan> <4431648D.6050809@drussell.dnsalias.com> Message-ID: <1144104474.2341.5.camel@defender.antaresenterprises.lan> On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 11:08 -0700, Don Russell wrote: > Michael Fleming wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-04-02 at 21:16 -0700, Don Russell wrote: > > Somewhat off topic, but this has led me to get off my arse and update my > > own phpmyadmin package - have a wander over to > > http://www.enlartenment.com/packages/fedora/5/x86_64/repodata/repoview/phpmyadmin-0-2.8.0.2-1.fc5.mf.html > > (actually a noarch package that should install anywhere, also in > > FC4/i386 repo flavour :-) > > > > It's certainly not ready for Extras though and more a quick whip-up. > > Poke me enough and I'll give it more work though :-P > > OK... I went to your web page and d/l the rpm.... a couple of observations: > Your page says the file is 11.59MBytes, but I get an actual size of: > Length: 3,752,535 (3.6M) The file size in RPM -qi / repoview refers to the actual size of the installed package not the RPM file itself. If the md5/sha1sum + gpg sig checks out it's all good. > What time zone are you in? Changelog date says Tue 4 Apr 2006 08:00:00 I'm in Australian Eastern Standard Time - the timestamp is the mock buildroot being funny/odd. I think it tries for UTC and makes a mess of it. > Right now it is Mon 3 Apr 2006 18:05 UTC > > I'll try to get to your rpm today and give you some feedback. Cheers - I've already found one item for improvement (proper place for the web-based install to save the config.inc.php file) but anything else you see would be great. > Don Michael. -- Michael Fleming "Bother" said the Borg, "We've assimilated Pooh!" From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 3 22:54:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 18:54:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604032254.k33MsngF014458@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From anmar at gmx.net 2006-04-03 18:54 EST ------- There are a few typos: --- monodevelop-orig.spec 2006-01-25 12:10:29.000000000 +0100 +++ monodevelop.spec 2006-04-03 23:23:00.000000000 +0200 @@ -53,19 +53,19 @@ %{__install} -c -m 644 Core/src/MonoDevelop.Core/MonoDevelop.Core.addin.xml %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Core.addin.xml %{__install} -c -m 644 build/bin/MonoDevelop.Core.dll %{monodevdir}/bin/MonoDevelop.Core.dll %{__install} -c -m 644 build/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Components.dll %{monodevdir}/bin/MonoDevelop.Components.dll -%{__install} -c -m 644 Core/src/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui.addin.xml %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui.xml +%{__install} -c -m 644 Core/src/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui.addin.xml %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui.addin.xml %{__install} -c -m 644 build/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui.dll %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui.dll %{__install} -c -m 644 Core/src/MonoDevelop.Documentation/MonoDevelop.Documentation.addin.xml %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Documentation.addin.xml %{__install} -c -m 644 build/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Documentation.dll %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Documentation.dll -%{__install} -c -m 644 Core/src/MonoDevelop.Projects/MonoDevelop.Projects.addin.xml %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Projects.adding.xml +%{__install} -c -m 644 Core/src/MonoDevelop.Projects/MonoDevelop.Projects.addin.xml %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Projects.addin.xml %{__install} -c -m 644 build/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Projects.dll %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Projects.dll -%{__install} -c -m 644 Core/src/MonoDevelop.Projects.Gui/MonoDevelop.Projects.Gui.addin.xml %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Projects.Gui.adding.xml +%{__install} -c -m 644 Core/src/MonoDevelop.Projects.Gui/MonoDevelop.Projects.Gui.addin.xml %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Projects.Gui.addin.xml %{__install} -c -m 644 build/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Projects.Gui.dll %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Projects.Gui.dll -%{__install} -c -m 644 Core/src/MonoDevelop.Ide/MonoDevelop.Ide.addin.xml %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Ide.adding.xml +%{__install} -c -m 644 Core/src/MonoDevelop.Ide/MonoDevelop.Ide.addin.xml %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Ide.addin.xml %{__install} -c -m 644 build/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Ide.dll %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Ide.dll %{__install} -c -m 644 build/data/options/DefaultEditingLayout.xml %{monodevdir}/data/options/DefaultEditingLayout.xml -%{__install} -c -m 644 build/data/options/MonoDevelopProperties.xml %{monodevdir}/data/options/MonoDevlopProperties.xml -%{__install} -c -m 644 build/data/options/MonoDevelop-templates.xml %{monodevdir}/data/options/MonoDevelop-Templates.xml +%{__install} -c -m 644 build/data/options/MonoDevelopProperties.xml %{monodevdir}/data/options/MonoDevelopProperties.xml +%{__install} -c -m 644 build/data/options/MonoDevelop-templates.xml %{monodevdir}/data/options/MonoDevelop-templates.xml %{__install} -c -m 644 build/data/options/MonoDevelop-tools.xml %{monodevdir}/data/options/MonoDevelop-tools.xml %{__install} -c -m 644 build/data/options/TipsOfTheDay.xml %{monodevdir}/data/options/TipsOfTheDay.xml %{__install} -c -m 644 build/bin/MonoDevelop.exe %{monodevdir}/bin/MonoDevelop.exe -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From ivazquez at ivazquez.net Mon Apr 3 23:22:00 2006 From: ivazquez at ivazquez.net (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 19:22:00 -0400 Subject: How to make SELinux file context permanent? In-Reply-To: <1144099832.7174.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> References: <1144099832.7174.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: <1144106520.5737.1.camel@ignacio.lan> On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 23:30 +0200, G?rard Milmeister wrote: > I have two packages, gcl and ecl, lisp compilers, that > need a context change of some binaries from > system_u:object_r:lib_t > to > system_u:object_r:textrel_shlib_t > These files reside in subdirectories of /usr/lib. Is it > possible to set context during RPM creation? > In any case, the changes are not permament, because after > a relabeling (or restorecon) of the filesystem, the context > reverts to the default. > What is the least painless way to do this correctly? In FC5 it's to create a policy module and load it during %post. In FC4 it's to file a bug against selinux-policy-targeted. http://sepolicy-server.sourceforge.net/index.php?page=module-overview http://fedora.redhat.com/docs/selinux-faq-fc5/ -- Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams http://fedora.ivazquez.net/ gpg --keyserver hkp://subkeys.pgp.net --recv-key 38028b72 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From fedora at adslpipe.co.uk Mon Apr 3 23:41:08 2006 From: fedora at adslpipe.co.uk (Andy Burns) Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 00:41:08 +0100 Subject: How to make SELinux file context permanent? In-Reply-To: <1144099832.7174.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> References: <1144099832.7174.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: <4431B294.2020603@adslpipe.co.uk> G?????????????????????????????????? wrote: > the changes are not permament, because after > a relabeling (or restorecon) of the filesystem, the context > reverts to the default. this might be addressed in future http://danwalsh.livejournal.com/4368.html From gemi at bluewin.ch Mon Apr 3 23:50:33 2006 From: gemi at bluewin.ch (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard?= Milmeister) Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 01:50:33 +0200 Subject: How to make SELinux file context permanent? In-Reply-To: <1144106520.5737.1.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <1144099832.7174.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> <1144106520.5737.1.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <1144108233.11808.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 19:22 -0400, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > In FC5 it's to create a policy module and load it during %post. Ok let's say I have to do the following: semanage fcontext -a -t textrel_shlib_t '/usr/lib/xorg/modules/extensions/nvidia/.*\.so(\.[^/]*)*' which is necessary for prop. nvidia glx from livna to work. 1. How do I create a module from this? 2. What do I package with the RPM, and where should I put it (location in the filesystem)? 3. What do I do in %post? I presume the module is loaded in %post, and unloaded in %postun. 4. Does the module survive a policy update? Maybe one could put a tutorial together for packagers. -- G?rard Milmeister Langackerstrasse 49 CH-8057 Z?rich From ivg2 at cornell.edu Mon Apr 3 23:52:45 2006 From: ivg2 at cornell.edu (Ivan Gyurdiev) Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 19:52:45 -0400 Subject: How to make SELinux file context permanent? In-Reply-To: <1144106520.5737.1.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <1144099832.7174.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> <1144106520.5737.1.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <4431B54D.4080307@cornell.edu> Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 23:30 +0200, G?rard Milmeister wrote: > >> I have two packages, gcl and ecl, lisp compilers, that >> need a context change of some binaries from >> system_u:object_r:lib_t >> to >> system_u:object_r:textrel_shlib_t >> These files reside in subdirectories of /usr/lib. Is it >> possible to set context during RPM creation? >> In any case, the changes are not permament, because after >> a relabeling (or restorecon) of the filesystem, the context >> reverts to the default. >> What is the least painless way to do this correctly? >> Ask upstream why text relocations are needed. Refer to this URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/selinux-mem.html If text relocations are not needed, upstream should fix the package. If text relocations are needed, file a bug against policy. > > In FC5 it's to create a policy module and load it during %post. Creating a policy module should not be necessary - you can use the semanage command with the fcontext option to add file context specification to the local config. However, adding a workaround is *not* the correct solution. From Lam at Lam.pl Tue Apr 4 00:39:51 2006 From: Lam at Lam.pl (Leszek Matok) Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 02:39:51 +0200 Subject: How to make SELinux file context permanent? In-Reply-To: <1144108233.11808.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> References: <1144099832.7174.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> <1144106520.5737.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <1144108233.11808.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: <1144111191.2803.15.camel@pensja.lam.pl> Dnia 04-04-2006, wto o godzinie 01:50 +0200, G?rard Milmeister napisa?(a): > 1. How do I create a module from this? You don't - you don't need to define new roles/types/domains, you just want to make sure a file has permanent security context, for which semanage is sufficient. Lam -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: To jest cz??? listu podpisana cyfrowo URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 00:39:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 20:39:08 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187843] Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604040039.k340d818029112@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187843 ------- Additional Comments From gregswallow at skynetonline.ca 2006-04-03 20:38 EST ------- Just wanted to make you aware of someone else packaging phpMyAdmin: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/SRPMS/phpMyAdmin-2.8.0.2-1.fc4.remi.src.rpm Probably you knew about this one already, but just in case you didn't know, now you can collaborate. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From Lam at Lam.pl Tue Apr 4 01:03:26 2006 From: Lam at Lam.pl (Leszek Matok) Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 03:03:26 +0200 Subject: How to make SELinux file context permanent? In-Reply-To: <4431B54D.4080307@cornell.edu> References: <1144099832.7174.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> <1144106520.5737.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <4431B54D.4080307@cornell.edu> Message-ID: <1144112606.2803.37.camel@pensja.lam.pl> Dnia 03-04-2006, pon o godzinie 19:52 -0400, Ivan Gyurdiev napisa?(a): > Creating a policy module should not be necessary - you can use the > semanage command with the fcontext option to add file context > specification to the local config. However, adding a workaround is *not* > the correct solution. Please explain. Why is binding the context to the packaged file a workaround, while maintaining one big list of all files that people possibly could put on their systems (year, right, dream on) is a solution? Also, in this situation, why isn't there one big list of e. g. writable files allowed for any system, and especially, one big list of set-uid programs allowed for any system? For me it's natural that a file context is bound to the file and should be transported with it/stay sticked to it. semanage is already somewhat portable (I can check for its presence, I can check for particular type/role I'm interested in - my RPM package can still be installed on any system, regardless of SELinux presence, policies and so on), and remember it doesn't really need to if I know what system I'm building for (and this is Fedora Extras, not a "Build a completely cross-distro RPM packages-HowTo"). The existence of policy modules also suggest that "one big policy for everyone" is not a goal of SELinux, or at least suggests to me. Lam -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: To jest cz??? listu podpisana cyfrowo URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 02:08:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 22:08:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187843] Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604040208.k3428sQi010284@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187843 fedora at drussell.dnsalias.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora at drussell.dnsalias.com ------- Additional Comments From fedora at drussell.dnsalias.com 2006-04-03 22:08 EST ------- Added myself to the "interested parties" list. :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 03:45:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 23:45:04 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187706] Review Request: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604040345.k343j4Lc001927@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187706 ------- Additional Comments From michel.salim at gmail.com 2006-04-03 23:44 EST ------- Ah. I recall tinkering with asound.conf but it was a bit hit-and-miss - from perusing this page: http://alsa.opensrc.org/index.php?page=DmixPlugin it's not immediately clear what are the minimal changes that needs to be made to support DMIX-ing OSS applications. Answering Thorsten, a comment in the discussion last May said that if DMIX is enabled by default it would be a reason to reconsider having alsa-oss. And DMIX is enabled by default.. Ignacio, if you could provide a simple change to asound.conf that enables DMIX for OSS applications and nothing else, and bugzilla it against .. alsa-utils or alsa-lib?, then I would just cancel this request. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From vic_sk at yahoo.com Tue Apr 4 05:42:45 2006 From: vic_sk at yahoo.com (Victor Skovorodnikov) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 22:42:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Contribution to Extras In-Reply-To: <200604040345.k343j4Lc001927@www.beta.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060404054245.51377.qmail@web32604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Greetings, I've just finished a 2D shooter game "Space Invaders" and was wondering if it could be added to Fedora's Extra's section at some point. This is not a final version but it would be very easy to modify it to make it work as you think is best. The game can be downloaded as either source or binary from my site at: www.victorsk.webhop.org It's perfectly ready to run if you choose a 'binary' option but you'd need to have 'Imlib' installed on your system to compile. While in my attempts at reducing the image size and making parameters pass as pointers and other performance optimization, I think this game has become a little too fast for playing, but again it would be easy to modify it as you'd like. I have also been working on an RMI chess game but that has been going rather slowly. Thank you and I look forward to your feedback, Sincerely, Victor. --------------------------------- Blab-away for as little as 1?/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ivg2 at cornell.edu Tue Apr 4 05:44:29 2006 From: ivg2 at cornell.edu (Ivan Gyurdiev) Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 01:44:29 -0400 Subject: How to make SELinux file context permanent? In-Reply-To: <1144112606.2803.37.camel@pensja.lam.pl> References: <1144099832.7174.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> <1144106520.5737.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <4431B54D.4080307@cornell.edu> <1144112606.2803.37.camel@pensja.lam.pl> Message-ID: <443207BD.6050007@cornell.edu> Leszek Matok wrote: > Dnia 03-04-2006, pon o godzinie 19:52 -0400, Ivan Gyurdiev napisa?(a): > >> Creating a policy module should not be necessary - you can use the >> semanage command with the fcontext option to add file context >> specification to the local config. However, adding a workaround is *not* >> the correct solution. >> > Please explain. Why is binding the context to the packaged file a > workaround, while maintaining one big list of all files that people > possibly could put on their systems (year, right, dream on) is a > solution? > Neither is a solution, the correct solution is to remove the need for text relocation in the first place if possible. As far as modules are concerned, I agree that this is the long-term goal, but AFAIK how modules will work with rpm has yet to be worked out - I believe Dan Walsh is working on this, I am not sure what the current status is. > For me it's natural that a file context is bound to the file and should > be transported with it/stay sticked to it. semanage is already somewhat > portable (I can check for its presence, I can check for particular > type/role I'm interested in - my RPM package can still be installed on > any system, regardless of SELinux presence, policies and so on), and > remember it doesn't really need to if I know what system I'm building > for (and this is Fedora Extras, not a "Build a completely cross-distro > RPM packages-HowTo"). > Yes, file context need to be stored in the package, nobody is arguing against modularity. Separating compile-time and link-time are just part of the problem, however - the other details still have to be worked out about how modules will be installed alongside the standard rpm transaction. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 05:47:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 01:47:40 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187351] Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604040547.k345le5S022962@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187351 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-04-04 01:47 EST ------- I'm trying to test it but i can' achieve to fill in the music library. I select a directory containing ogg files (maybe all not tagged correctly) and try to add these. The system seems to look at he files and the end add nothing. Another thing, when you insert an audio cd and you try to read the files in, you can't see the gnome-mounted cd. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From adrian at lisas.de Tue Apr 4 06:48:33 2006 From: adrian at lisas.de (Adrian Reber) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 08:48:33 +0200 Subject: 855resolution package In-Reply-To: <1144098944.24151.30.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> References: <1144098944.24151.30.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060404064833.GA6598@lisas.de> On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 02:45:44AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > I heard someone raving about this one - 855resolution > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187221 > > Maybe someone wants to package it for Fedora Extras? It is already waiting to be reviewed: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186391 Adrian From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Tue Apr 4 07:30:47 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 09:30:47 +0200 Subject: Contribution to Extras In-Reply-To: <20060404054245.51377.qmail@web32604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060404054245.51377.qmail@web32604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <443220A7.7090606@hhs.nl> Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > Greetings, > > I've just finished a 2D shooter game "Space Invaders" and was wondering > if it could be added to Fedora's Extra's section at some point. This is > not a final version but it would be very easy to modify it to make it > work as you think is best. > > The game can be downloaded as either source or binary from my site at: > > www.victorsk.webhop.org > > It's perfectly ready to run if you choose a 'binary' option but you'd > need to have 'Imlib' installed on your system to compile. > > While in my attempts at reducing the image size and making parameters > pass as pointers and other performance optimization, I think this game > has become a little too fast for playing, but again it would be easy to > modify it as you'd like. > > I have also been working on an RMI chess game but that has been going > rather slowly. > > Thank you and I look forward to your feedback, > Sincerely, > Victor. > The screenshots look nice, so I might concider packaging it, but: -the name "space invaders" is a know for an already existing and well known game and thus cannot be used legally please come up with a new name. -their is no license on the code nor on the images, please add a License under which people can (re)distribute and use your code and images, this license must of course meet Fedora's guidelines. -I didn't try the game yet, but I saw no sound files, so I assume there is no sound. Pretty graphics is good, but a game without sound is not complete, and thus I won't package it. Thanks & Regards, Hans From vic_sk at yahoo.com Tue Apr 4 07:41:39 2006 From: vic_sk at yahoo.com (Victor Skovorodnikov) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 00:41:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Contribution to Extras In-Reply-To: <443220A7.7090606@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <20060404074139.88565.qmail@web32602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear Hans, Thank you so much for replying. I will make the appropriate modifications to comply with your specifications. Very much appreciate your feedback. Thank you, Victor. Hans de Goede wrote: Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > Greetings, > > I've just finished a 2D shooter game "Space Invaders" and was wondering > if it could be added to Fedora's Extra's section at some point. This is > not a final version but it would be very easy to modify it to make it > work as you think is best. > > The game can be downloaded as either source or binary from my site at: > > www.victorsk.webhop.org > > It's perfectly ready to run if you choose a 'binary' option but you'd > need to have 'Imlib' installed on your system to compile. > > While in my attempts at reducing the image size and making parameters > pass as pointers and other performance optimization, I think this game > has become a little too fast for playing, but again it would be easy to > modify it as you'd like. > > I have also been working on an RMI chess game but that has been going > rather slowly. > > Thank you and I look forward to your feedback, > Sincerely, > Victor. > The screenshots look nice, so I might concider packaging it, but: -the name "space invaders" is a know for an already existing and well known game and thus cannot be used legally please come up with a new name. -their is no license on the code nor on the images, please add a License under which people can (re)distribute and use your code and images, this license must of course meet Fedora's guidelines. -I didn't try the game yet, but I saw no sound files, so I assume there is no sound. Pretty graphics is good, but a game without sound is not complete, and thus I won't package it. Thanks & Regards, Hans -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list --------------------------------- New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevin.kofler at chello.at Tue Apr 4 08:16:20 2006 From: kevin.kofler at chello.at (Kevin Kofler) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 08:16:20 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Contribution to Extras References: <200604040345.k343j4Lc001927@www.beta.redhat.com> <20060404054245.51377.qmail@web32604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > Greetings, I've just finished a 2D shooter game "Space Invaders" [...] > The game can be downloaded as either source or binary from my site at: > www.victorsk.webhop.org [snip] FYI, Star Control 2 (which you mention on the game's site as the source for your graphics) hasn't been forgotten. It has been GPLed and renamed to "Ur-Quan Masters" because of trademark licensing issues (the people who own the game's code only had a license to the "Star Control" trademark and so couldn't use it for the GPL release), and it's even available in Extras (yum install uqm). In other words, you're lucky because this means you'll probably get away with "borrowing" its graphics for your game. Kevin Kofler From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 08:41:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 04:41:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182415] Review Request: manpages-uk-utf8 - Ukrainian man pages from Linux Documentation Project In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604040841.k348frZv024940@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: manpages-uk-utf8 - Ukrainian man pages from Linux Documentation Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182415 andy at smile.org.ua changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: man-pages-uk|Review Request: manpages-uk- |- Ukrainian man pages from |utf8 - Ukrainian man pages |Linux Documentation Project |from Linux Documentation | |Project ------- Additional Comments From andy at smile.org.ua 2006-04-04 04:41 EST ------- * Tue Apr 04 2006 Andy Shevchenko - update to 20060328 snapshot - change version according to Makefile Spec Name or Url: ftp://andriy.asplinux.com.ua/pub/people/andy/extras/manpages- uk-utf8.spec SRPM Name or Url: ftp://andriy.asplinux.com.ua/pub/people/andy/extras/manpages- uk-utf8-0.1-0.1.20060328.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 08:44:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 04:44:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187843] Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604040844.k348i7Fb025565@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187843 mfleming+rpm at enlartenment.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mfleming+rpm at enlartenment.co | |m ------- Additional Comments From mfleming+rpm at enlartenment.com 2006-04-04 04:43 EST ------- See also http://www.enlartenment.com/packages/fedora/5/x86_64/repodata/repoview/phpmyadmin-0-2.8.0.2-1.fc5.mf.html for my contribution. Not a review per-se, but some comments after an elementary look at the package: - Feel free to be more verbose in the %description and summary - you can do far more than simply browse databases with it, it's a full admin app after all. - The source package doesn't ship a default config.inc.php file, users would normally create one on the fly. Yours is a good base but I would personally create a %{_localstatedir}/www/phpmyadmin/scripts/config dir per the install instructions (unfortunately they want it world writable *sigh*) allowing the user to create the config via the included /scripts/setup.php interface without much hassle. - I would not restart apache in %post/%postun - either issue a reload or leave it for the administrator to perform manually. Look at the services related scriptlet at http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/ScriptletSnippets#head-a1898cc5440737a43df9b41b9ad6d7e7c7c3e6e2 Michael. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 08:46:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 04:46:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 180319] Review Request: svnmailer - Tool to post subversion repository commit information In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604040846.k348kKKv025953@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: svnmailer - Tool to post subversion repository commit information https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180319 ------- Additional Comments From mfleming+rpm at enlartenment.com 2006-04-04 04:45 EST ------- Ping - anyone interested in this still? I've rebuilt my copy for FC5, seems to work OK. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 08:53:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 04:53:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 183912] Review Request: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection Kit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604040853.k348racY027467@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection Kit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183912 ------- Additional Comments From andy at smile.org.ua 2006-04-04 04:53 EST ------- * Tue Apr 04 2006 Andy Shevchenko - update to 0.101.1 SRPM Name or Url: ftp://andriy.asplinux.com.ua/pub/people/andy/extras/jack- audio-connection-kit-0.101.1-1.src.rpm Spec Name or Url: ftp://andriy.asplinux.com.ua/pub/people/andy/extras/jack- audio-connection-kit.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 09:18:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 05:18:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172872] Review Request: sloccount In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604040918.k349IOQJ032391@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sloccount https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172872 bnocera at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From bnocera at redhat.com 2006-04-04 05:18 EST ------- Thanks for the advices Ed, it's all in CVS now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 4 09:42:42 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 09:42:42 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-04 Message-ID: <20060404094242.4025.71893@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch wine-cms 0.9.11-1.fc3.i386 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: andreas.bierfert AT lowlatency.de package: wine-cms - 0.9.11-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: liblcms.so.1 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 4 09:42:53 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 09:42:53 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-04 Message-ID: <20060404094253.4030.57760@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch wine-cms 0.9.11-1.fc4.i386 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: andreas.bierfert AT lowlatency.de package: wine-cms - 0.9.11-1.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: liblcms.so.1 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 4 09:43:03 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 09:43:03 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-04 Message-ID: <20060404094303.4035.93587@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 4 09:43:18 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 09:43:18 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-04 Message-ID: <20060404094318.4369.93412@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 10:01:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 06:01:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187236] Review Request: smixer - A simple interface to /dev/mixer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041001.k34A1T1I009259@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smixer - A simple interface to /dev/mixer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187236 bnocera at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bnocera at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From bnocera at redhat.com 2006-04-04 06:01 EST ------- That looks like an equivalent to amixer but for OSS, which I don't think we support natively anymore. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 10:18:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 06:18:51 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187236] Review Request: smixer - A simple interface to /dev/mixer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041018.k34AIpTl012676@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smixer - A simple interface to /dev/mixer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187236 ------- Additional Comments From andreas at bawue.net 2006-04-04 06:18 EST ------- Problem is, there seems to be some software out there, which is using smixer for volume control. It seems to be used by several web-based mp3/ogg jukeboxes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 10:35:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 06:35:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187843] Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041035.k34AZs8c016094@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187843 dmitry at butskoy.name changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dmitry at butskoy.name ------- Additional Comments From dmitry at butskoy.name 2006-04-04 06:35 EST ------- Don't place files under /var/www . Actually! It is not a VARiable stuff. Place under /usr/share/phpmyadmin and use Apache's alias directive... See "squirrelmail" package from the Core, or "phpldapadmin" from the Extras for an example. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 10:47:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 06:47:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182415] Review Request: manpages-uk-utf8 - Ukrainian man pages from Linux Documentation Project In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041047.k34AlWcO018464@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: manpages-uk-utf8 - Ukrainian man pages from Linux Documentation Project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182415 ------- Additional Comments From dmitry at butskoy.name 2006-04-04 06:47 EST ------- For comment #5: > 1. Why the need to change the name to remove the -utf8? I can't recall seeing > anything in the FE rules over that The similar Core packages have names in the form "man-pages-LL", where LL is "fr", "de", etc. Therefore this package must have the same naming scheme as the Core uses. It is an obvious exception from the "FE rules" -- the Core behaviour always takes precedence over the Extras, as Extras is just the additional stuff for the Core... Paul, with the current naming there are: "man-pages-cs", "man-pages-de", "man-pages-es", ... "manpages-uk-utf8" ?!?! Agree, it looks ugly! Andy, I suggest you to rename it back. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Tue Apr 4 11:20:24 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 13:20:24 +0200 Subject: Contribution to Extras In-Reply-To: References: <200604040345.k343j4Lc001927@www.beta.redhat.com> <20060404054245.51377.qmail@web32604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <44325678.4050007@hhs.nl> Kevin Kofler wrote: >> Greetings, I've just finished a 2D shooter game "Space Invaders" [...] >> The game can be downloaded as either source or binary from my site at: >> www.victorsk.webhop.org > [snip] > > FYI, Star Control 2 (which you mention on the game's site as the source for > your graphics) hasn't been forgotten. It has been GPLed and renamed to "Ur-Quan > Masters" because of trademark licensing issues (the people who own the game's > code only had a license to the "Star Control" trademark and so couldn't use it > for the GPL release), and it's even available in Extras (yum install uqm). In > other words, you're lucky because this means you'll probably get away with > "borrowing" its graphics for your game. > > Kevin Kofler Good catch, Victor this does mean that your code must be licensed under the GPL. Regards, Hans From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 11:43:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 07:43:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041143.k34BhI5A029696@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zaptel-kmod https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177583 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-04-04 07:43 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-kmod-1.2.5-1.2.6.16_1.2088_FC6.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-kmod-1.2.5-1.2.6.16_1.2088_FC6.spec * Mon Mar 27 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.5-1 - Update to 1.2.5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 11:45:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 07:45:58 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041145.k34Bjwk6030270@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zaptel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177584 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-04-04 07:45 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-1.2.5-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/zaptel-1.2.5-1.src.rpm %changelog * Mon Mar 27 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.5-1 - Update to 1.2.5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 12:30:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 08:30:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185423] Review Request: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging: make-rpm-spec command for PEAR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041230.k34CU7AR005749@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging: make-rpm-spec command for PEAR https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185423 rpm at timj.co.uk changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- BugsThisDependsOn| |183359 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at timj.co.uk 2006-04-04 08:29 EST ------- Thanks for the feedback Remi. 1) The relocation problem, yes, that's probably a PEAR <1.4.7 vs PEAR 1.4.7+ thing. I think that it might be easier for this package just to wait on bug #183359, since PEAR 1.4.7 has important packaging fixes. Or depending on how long that takes I might investigate further making it work on older versions. It doesn't seem like a very productive use of time though. 2) the %files thing is fixed upstream (see http://pear.php.net/bugs/7129) so I'll also wait on a new release upstream (by me :) before proceeding with this package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 12:37:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 08:37:45 -0400 Subject: [Bug 166547] Review Request: multisync - Calendar (and other PIM data) synchronization program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041237.k34CbjT3007961@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: multisync - Calendar (and other PIM data) synchronization program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166547 ------- Additional Comments From pawsa at theochem.kth.se 2006-04-04 08:37 EST ------- Actually, comment in #19 re %makeinstall is perfectly valid: it puts some C headers in a wrong place, directly in /usr/include instead of /usr/include/rra -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 12:49:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 08:49:45 -0400 Subject: [Bug 165311] Review Request: Tiger, security auditing on UNIX systems In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041249.k34CnjFd010161@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Tiger, security auditing on UNIX systems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165311 ------- Additional Comments From gauret at free.fr 2006-04-04 08:49 EST ------- Spec : http://gauret.free.fr/fichiers/rpms/fedora/tiger.spec SRPM : http://gauret.free.fr/fichiers/rpms/fedora/tiger-3.2.1-1.src.rpm I've fixed the command options which caused problems on FC5, and added comments to tiger.ignore The Debian package changelog has "updated to CVS" entries, so I guess upstream is still active (or Debian has taken over upstream). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 12:50:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 08:50:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 165311] Review Request: Tiger, security auditing on UNIX systems In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041250.k34CoGaX010276@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Tiger, security auditing on UNIX systems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165311 ------- Additional Comments From gauret at free.fr 2006-04-04 08:49 EST ------- Spec : http://gauret.free.fr/fichiers/rpms/fedora/tiger.spec SRPM : http://gauret.free.fr/fichiers/rpms/fedora/tiger-3.2.1-1.src.rpm I've fixed the command options which caused problems on FC5, and added comments to tiger.ignore The Debian package changelog has "updated to CVS" entries, so I guess upstream is still active (or Debian has taken over upstream). ------- Additional Comments From gauret at free.fr 2006-04-04 08:49 EST ------- Spec : http://gauret.free.fr/fichiers/rpms/fedora/tiger.spec SRPM : http://gauret.free.fr/fichiers/rpms/fedora/tiger-3.2.1-2.src.rpm I've fixed the command options which caused problems on FC5, and added comments to tiger.ignore The Debian package changelog has "updated to CVS" entries, so I guess upstream is still active (or Debian has taken over upstream). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 4 13:38:08 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 09:38:08 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060404133808.6CFAF7FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 3 perl-AnyData-0.10-2.fc3 perl-Devel-StackTrace-1.13-1.fc3 perl-Want-0.10-1.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 4 13:38:15 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 09:38:15 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060404133815.01FE47FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 9 gnokii-0.6.12-4.fc4 gtkterm-0.99.5-1.fc4 k3b-extras-0.12.14-2.fc4 libmpcdec-1.2.2-2.fc4 perl-AnyData-0.10-2.fc4 perl-Devel-StackTrace-1.13-1.fc4 perl-SOAP-Lite-0.60a-3.fc4 perl-Want-0.10-1.fc4 python-imaging-1.1.5-3.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 4 13:38:31 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 09:38:31 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060404133831.100707FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 12 azureus-2.4.0.3-0.20060328cvs_3.fc5 cgoban-1.9.14-7.fc5 gnokii-0.6.12-4.fc5 k3b-extras-0.12.14-2.fc5 libmpcdec-1.2.2-2.fc5 perl-AnyData-0.10-2.fc5 perl-Devel-StackTrace-1.13-1.fc5 perl-SOAP-Lite-0.60a-3.fc5 perl-Tree-Simple-1.16-1.fc5 perl-Want-0.10-1.fc5 pwgen-2.05-3.fc5 python-imaging-1.1.5-4.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 4 13:38:41 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 09:38:41 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060404133841.7B66B7FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 13 cgoban-1.9.14-7.fc6 perl-AnyData-0.10-2.fc6 perl-Devel-StackTrace-1.13-1.fc6 perl-Params-Validate-0.81-1.fc6 perl-Tree-Simple-1.16-1.fc6 perl-Want-0.10-1.fc6 python-imaging-1.1.5-4.fc6 scim-fcitx-3.1.1-5.fc6 scim-input-pad-0.1.1-4.fc6 scim-skk-0.5.2-4.fc6 scim-tomoe-0.2.0-4.fc6 sloccount-2.26-3 zasx-1.30-1.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 13:34:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 09:34:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187236] Review Request: smixer - A simple interface to /dev/mixer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041334.k34DYIVu019156@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smixer - A simple interface to /dev/mixer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187236 ------- Additional Comments From bnocera at redhat.com 2006-04-04 09:34 EST ------- I think you would be better off filing bugs against those pieces of software, rather than importing a program that won't work as expected. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 14:28:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 10:28:45 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187843] Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041428.k34ESjL9029156@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187843 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-04-04 10:28 EST ------- Spec: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/phpMyAdmin/phpMyAdmin.spec SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/phpMyAdmin/phpMyAdmin-2.8.0.2-2.src.rpm - Moved everything to %{_datadir} - Moved config file to /etc/ - Used description from phpMyAdmin project info -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 14:37:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 10:37:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187913] New: Review Request: mysql-query-browser Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187913 Summary: Review Request: mysql-query-browser Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: dennis at ausil.us QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://ausil.us/packages/mysql-query-browser.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://ausil.us/packages/mysql-query-browser-1.1.18-1.src.rpm Description: The MySQL Query Browser is a graphical tool provided by MySQL AB for creating, executing, and optimizing queries in a graphical environment. Where the MySQL Administrator is designed to administer a MySQL server, the MySQL Query Browser is designed to help you query and analyze data stored within your MySQL database. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 15:33:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 11:33:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187843] Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041533.k34FXvNJ011458@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187843 ------- Additional Comments From dmitry at butskoy.name 2006-04-04 11:33 EST ------- IMO it is better to auto-generate phpMyAdmin.htaccess file somewhere in the spec, i.e.: cat >phpMyAdmin.htaccess < References: <442D90A5.6010901@hhs.nl> <1143964220.3403.8.camel@eagle.danny.cz> <4431876A.9020706@hhs.nl> <44319026.3050402@kobold.org> Message-ID: <1144165406.3443.13.camel@eagle.danny.cz> Michael Thomas p??e v Po 03. 04. 2006 v 14:14 -0700: > Hans de Goede wrote: > > > > Its already build for FC-4, but assume you mean build the latest > > version. Thats not exactly my habbit (I need to think about howto handle > > this* one of these days). But I've synced FC-4 with 5 and devel and > > requested a build for you :) Thanks. > > > > Regards, > > > > Hans > > > > * This = When doing (minor?) updates to a newer FE-release and/or devel > > do I also push this for older FE releases. I believe this is what most > > others do maybe we need to make this policy for minor updates. > > IMO, it's up to the maintainer whether they want to push updates to > older releases. Ideally these updates would be validated on the older > releases before being pushed, and not all maintainers have the resources > to test on all releases and architectures. If the maintainer can find > someone with access to the other releases/architectures who is willing > to validate an update then that will make the job easier. > So we can create some kind of build requests in bugzilla, where can be written "I have built succesfully package foo from devel srpm, please rebuild also for FC-x." And the maintainer can accept it and update/build the package for FC-x or close it with WONTFIX. Dan From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 16:04:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:04:04 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187923] New: Review Request: blktool Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187923 Summary: Review Request: blktool Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: jgarzik at redhat.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://gtf.org/garzik/blktool/blktool.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://gtf.org/garzik/blktool/blktool-4-2.src.rpm Description: Block device settings tool -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From ville.skytta at iki.fi Tue Apr 4 16:18:09 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 19:18:09 +0300 Subject: Contribution to Extras In-Reply-To: <44325678.4050007@hhs.nl> References: <200604040345.k343j4Lc001927@www.beta.redhat.com> <20060404054245.51377.qmail@web32604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <44325678.4050007@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1144167489.2898.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 13:20 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > > Kevin Kofler wrote: > >> Greetings, I've just finished a 2D shooter game "Space Invaders" [...] > >> The game can be downloaded as either source or binary from my site at: > >> www.victorsk.webhop.org > > [snip] > > > > FYI, Star Control 2 (which you mention on the game's site as the source for > > your graphics) hasn't been forgotten. It has been GPLed and renamed to "Ur-Quan > > Masters" because of trademark licensing issues (the people who own the game's > > code only had a license to the "Star Control" trademark and so couldn't use it > > for the GPL release), and it's even available in Extras (yum install uqm). In > > other words, you're lucky because this means you'll probably get away with > > "borrowing" its graphics for your game. > > > > Kevin Kofler > > Good catch, Victor this does mean that your code must be licensed under > the GPL. >From uqm's COPYING: The content -- voiceovers, dialogue, graphics, and music -- are copyright (C) 1992, 1993, 2002 Toys for Bob, Inc. or their respective creators. The content may be copied freely as part of a distribution of The Ur-Quan Masters. All other rights are reserved. (Side Note: The content will become more freely redistributable and reusable in later releases.) Note "as part of a distribution of The Ur-Quan Masters". From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 16:24:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:24:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187923] Review Request: blktool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041624.k34GOQkp021352@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: blktool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187923 ------- Additional Comments From jgarzik at redhat.com 2006-04-04 12:24 EST ------- Similar to "ethtool" package, found in Fedora Core. By the same author (me) as ethtool, too. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From notting at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 16:56:10 2006 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:56:10 -0400 Subject: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core Message-ID: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> We're intending to remove the GNOME1/GTK1 stack from Core soon. Initially, the following will go away: GConf Guppi ORBit gal gnome-libs gnome-print gtkhtml libgal23 libglade libgnomeprint15 oaf Later, these will follow: glib gtk+ gdk-pixbuf imlib Looking at Extras, the following things require glib/gtk+: Gtk-Perl qiv compat-wxGTK dillo gfontview amarok-visualisation (hah!) easytag gkrellmms xvattr freedroidrpg *xmms* diradmin amaya (wow) alsa-tools soundtracker gtkalog edb-gtk gsview gentoo gcombust bubblemon R-gnomeGUI bmp-xosd nomadsync If you own one of these, glib and gtk+ will need a maintainer.... Bill From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 16:50:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:50:41 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172872] Review Request: sloccount In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041650.k34GofT6026302@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sloccount https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172872 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-04-04 12:50 EST ------- Doesn't build with RPM optflags. A complete patch would be needed (since CFLAGS are not accepted) or a hack like this: --- sloccount.spec.orig 2006-04-04 11:21:23.000000000 +0200 +++ sloccount.spec 2006-04-04 18:54:27.000000000 +0200 @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ %setup -q %build -make +make CC="gcc ${RPM_OPT_FLAGS}" %install rm -rf ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From vic_sk at yahoo.com Tue Apr 4 17:33:26 2006 From: vic_sk at yahoo.com (Victor Skovorodnikov) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 10:33:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Contribution to Extras In-Reply-To: <1144167489.2898.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060404173326.80477.qmail@web32611.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Thank you for looking over this matter everyone. I have looked at the Fedora's games (I am not a gamer myself actually) to modify my game to be in synch with others and have decided to switch to C++ and: - Add a menu dialog consisting of sound preferences and such using wxWidgets - Expand a game area so there is more room to move. Thanks again for all your feedback and for looking over the StarControl2 thing. I'll keep you posted of my progress. Oh, and I renamed the game to "Maximum Destruction" (I hope there are no other games with this name) :) Best regards, Victor. Ville Skytt? wrote: On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 13:20 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > > Kevin Kofler wrote: > >> Greetings, I've just finished a 2D shooter game "Space Invaders" [...] > >> The game can be downloaded as either source or binary from my site at: > >> www.victorsk.webhop.org > > [snip] > > > > FYI, Star Control 2 (which you mention on the game's site as the source for > > your graphics) hasn't been forgotten. It has been GPLed and renamed to "Ur-Quan > > Masters" because of trademark licensing issues (the people who own the game's > > code only had a license to the "Star Control" trademark and so couldn't use it > > for the GPL release), and it's even available in Extras (yum install uqm). In > > other words, you're lucky because this means you'll probably get away with > > "borrowing" its graphics for your game. > > > > Kevin Kofler > > Good catch, Victor this does mean that your code must be licensed under > the GPL. >From uqm's COPYING: The content -- voiceovers, dialogue, graphics, and music -- are copyright (C) 1992, 1993, 2002 Toys for Bob, Inc. or their respective creators. The content may be copied freely as part of a distribution of The Ur-Quan Masters. All other rights are reserved. (Side Note: The content will become more freely redistributable and reusable in later releases.) Note "as part of a distribution of The Ur-Quan Masters". -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list --------------------------------- New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 17:50:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 13:50:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187932] New: Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187932 Summary: Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: orion at cora.nwra.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/paraview.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/paraview-2.4.3-1.src.rpm Description: ParaView is an application designed with the need to visualize large data sets in mind. The goals of the ParaView project include the following: * Develop an open-source, multi-platform visualization application. * Support distributed computation models to process large data sets. * Create an open, flexible, and intuitive user interface. * Develop an extensible architecture based on open standards. ParaView runs on distributed and shared memory parallel as well as single processor systems and has been successfully tested on Windows, Linux and various Unix workstations and clusters. Under the hood, ParaView uses the Visualization Toolkit as the data processing and rendering engine and has a user interface written using a unique blend of Tcl/Tk and C++. NOTE: This version has NOT been compiled with MPI support. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From kevin.kofler at chello.at Tue Apr 4 18:36:07 2006 From: kevin.kofler at chello.at (Kevin Kofler) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 18:36:07 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Contribution to Extras References: <200604040345.k343j4Lc001927@www.beta.redhat.com> <20060404054245.51377.qmail@web32604.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <44325678.4050007@hhs.nl> <1144167489.2898.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: > (Side Note: The content will become more freely redistributable > and reusable in later releases.) And as usual they have yet to take that promise up. Sad state of affairs indeed. :-( Games getting supposedly "open sourced", but with no Free / Open Source content to go with it are becoming more and more of a problem these days. At least the uqm content can actually be distributed with uqm... Kevin Kofler From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 19:29:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 15:29:35 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187923] Review Request: blktool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041929.k34JTZfa024184@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: blktool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187923 tmraz at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |tmraz at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From tmraz at redhat.com 2006-04-04 15:29 EST ------- Review: rpmlint complains: E: blktool zero-length /usr/share/doc/blktool-4/ChangeLog This can be ignored. The _sbindir macro is redefined, this is OK, however it should be probably later used instead of the plain /sbin. There is missing BuildRequires: glib2-devel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 19:48:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 15:48:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187843] Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041948.k34JmNAr029044@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187843 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-04-04 15:48 EST ------- I've done that in the past but a couple of reviewers convinced me to leave it as a source file. Here's some updates - stupid things I missed earlier. SPEC: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/phpMyAdmin/phpMyAdmin.spec SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/phpMyAdmin/phpMyAdmin-2.8.0.2-3.src.rpm - Made config files actually configs - Moved doc files to the doc dir -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 19:49:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 15:49:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187923] Review Request: blktool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604041949.k34JnGBI029292@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: blktool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187923 ------- Additional Comments From jgarzik at redhat.com 2006-04-04 15:49 EST ------- Updated to remove empty ChangeLog and add BuildRequires. _sbindir thing is just aping what evolution has wrought in blktool's sister package, Fedora Core ethtool. No idea why, but its important that both of these packages behave in a similar manner. New URLs: http://gtf.org/garzik/blktool/blktool.spec http://gtf.org/garzik/blktool/blktool-4-3.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 21:51:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 17:51:48 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177105] Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604042151.k34LpmY0026533@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177105 bugs.michael at gmx.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-04-04 17:51 EST ------- APPROVED If you don't have a Fedora Extras account yet, continue at step 10 here, http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors and I'll sponsor you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 21:52:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 17:52:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177104] Review Request: abook - Text-based addressbook program for mutt In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604042152.k34LqWK3026714@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: abook - Text-based addressbook program for mutt https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177104 bugs.michael at gmx.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-04-04 17:52 EST ------- It's still missing to empty the buildroot at beginning of %install. Fix that after CVS import. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 22:19:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 18:19:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187964] New: Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187964 Summary: Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: wart at kobold.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/bsd-games.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/bsd-games-2.17-1.src.rpm Description: Bsd-games includes adventure, arithmetic, atc, backgammon, battlestar, bcd, caesar, canfield, cfscores, cribbage, dm, fish, gomoku, hunt, mille, monop, morse, number, phantasia, pig, pom, ppt, primes, quiz, rain, random, robots, rot13, sail, snake, snscore, teachgammon, tetris-bsd, trek, wargames, worm, worms and wump. Version 2.9 of this packages was originally included with RedHat 7 and subsequently dropped. This is an update to 2.17 with some cleanup for Fedora Extras. This package still needs work; I just wanted to throw it out here while it was still fresh in my mind. Feel free to ignore this package review request until I've been able to clean up some of these known issues: * No documentation other than manpages is included, not even a license file. * None of the setgid games have been audited. I suspect that most, if not all, will need to be modified to be made more secure. * I have not tested the use of dm for limiting access to games. * Most of the games have not been tested yet. * rpmlint has lots of warnings about empty scoreboard files and strange setgid file permissions. This can be ignored. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 22:20:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 18:20:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187818] Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604042220.k34MK0fE031766@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187818 ------- Additional Comments From roland.wolters at gmx.net 2006-04-04 18:19 EST ------- Thank you very much for your detailed and very helpful comments, I corrected almost all mentioned problems, except one, which I think is the most important: the static libraries. Although I compiled with --disable-static and --enable-shared it still built the *.la and complained about the fact that these were installed but not packed. I try now to contact the ktorrent people in the hope that they can help me to correct their program. Is their any chance of correcting the problem through rpm like just not installing these files? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 23:02:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 19:02:11 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185205] Review Request: nqc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604042302.k34N2Bhi006483@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nqc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185205 ------- Additional Comments From nomis80 at nomis80.org 2006-04-04 19:02 EST ------- Can any reviewer approve this package please? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 23:16:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 19:16:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175495] Review Request: cgi-util: A C library for creating CGI programs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604042316.k34NG7EC008138@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cgi-util: A C library for creating CGI programs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175495 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-04-04 19:15 EST ------- I really would prefer that you use mv or rename in %prep instead of using a patch to rename files... but I'll consider it a non-blocker. OTOH, you need to remove the .cgi files from %{_bindir}. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 4 23:48:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 19:48:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187818] Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604042348.k34NmrHF013325@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187818 ------- Additional Comments From matt at truch.net 2006-04-04 19:48 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > Although I compiled with --disable-static and --enable-shared it still built > the *.la and complained about the fact that these were installed but not > packed. > > I try now to contact the ktorrent people in the hope that they can help me to > correct their program. Is their any chance of correcting the problem through > rpm like just not installing these files? Actually, this is a known bug and affects many KDE apps. Currently, you'll have to include the .la files. >From the fedora page: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines under the heading "Exclusion of Static Libraries" you'll see the comment: "[Comment from mschwendt: It is not that easy, unfortunately, to kill libtool dependency bloat this way. Some software needs libtool archives at run-time because it uses an old libltdl to dlopen DSOs or uses a broken libltdl (like KDE bug #93359).]" The KDE bug referenced is http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93359 for more info. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 00:20:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 20:20:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175495] Review Request: cgi-util: A C library for creating CGI programs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604050020.k350KvYl018378@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cgi-util: A C library for creating CGI programs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175495 ------- Additional Comments From redhat at flyn.org 2006-04-04 20:20 EST ------- The patch is used to rename files so that I can get this change upstream. The maintainers seem willing to accept it after the next version is released. The following implements Ignacio's recommendations: Spec Name or Url: http://flyn.org/SRPMS/cgi-util.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://flyn.org/SRPMS/cgi-util-2.2.1-7.src.rpm Description: A C library for creating Common Gateway Interface ("CGI") programs -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 00:54:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 20:54:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604050054.k350sbEM024210@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-04 20:54 EST ------- SPEC file: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodevelop.spec SRPM http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodevelop-0.9-3.src.rpm In addition to the typo corrections, I've made some really minor alterations to the spec file (basically, a few more typos fixed) Builds fine on x86. Not tested on x86_64 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 02:20:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 22:20:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187818] Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604050220.k352KaZf004349@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187818 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-04 22:20 EST ------- Roland, --disable-static doesn't disable libtool archives, notabug. The ktorrent devs won't (and shouldn't) care. However, you still really should omit %{_libdir}/lib*.la by either doing and the end of %install: rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/lib*.la or in %files section: %exclude %{_libdir}/lib*.la libtool archives in other places (like %{_libdir}/kde3/*.la for loadable modules or plugins) aren't harmful like those found at %{_libdir}/lib*.la that refer to shared libraries. So... they ought to be left alone. Besides, as noted, many apps (kde ones notably) actually *need* the .la files for the loadable modules/plugins to properly function. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 02:44:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 22:44:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187979] New: Review Request:
Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187979 Summary: Review Request:
Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: atennent at learn.senecac.on.ca QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://tux.senecac.on.ca/~atennent/cdogs.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://tux.senecac.on.ca/~atennent/cdogs-0.1.0-1.src.rpm Description: An SDL port of an old DOS game called Cyber-Dogs. You control 1 or 2 characters and try to kill enemies throughout various levels. A great game, definitely worth a try. Original game by Ronny Westor. SDL port by Jeremy Chin and Lucas Martin-King. The game is released as Freeware. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 02:44:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 22:44:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187980] New: Review Request: cdogs Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187980 Summary: Review Request: cdogs Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: atennent at learn.senecac.on.ca QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://tux.senecac.on.ca/~atennent/cdogs.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://tux.senecac.on.ca/~atennent/cdogs-0.1.0-1.src.rpm Description: An SDL port of an old DOS game called Cyber-Dogs. You control 1 or 2 characters and try to kill enemies throughout various levels. A great game, definitely worth a try. Original game by Ronny Westor. SDL port by Jeremy Chin and Lucas Martin-King. The game is released as Freeware. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From mike at mommabears.com Wed Apr 5 02:53:02 2006 From: mike at mommabears.com (MJang) Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 19:53:02 -0700 Subject: Tripwire and FC5 Message-ID: <1144205582.6748.7.camel@localhost> Folks, Procedure question. I see Tripwire has been removed from FC5 extras, but per http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/FC5Status , it's probably going to get a new maintainer soon. Will it be available in FC5 Extras after it gets the new maintainer, or will it go someplace else like Extras-Development? Thanks, Mike From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 02:51:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 22:51:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187979] Review Request:
In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604050251.k352p7nw010410@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187979 tkmame at retrogames.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request:
|package name here> ------- Additional Comments From tkmame at retrogames.com 2006-04-04 22:51 EST ------- Hi, there are just _so_ many things wrong with this spec file that it would be too much for me to list here. Please review: http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Drafts/BuildingPackagesGuide -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 02:53:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 22:53:47 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187980] Review Request: cdogs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604050253.k352rlne011036@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cdogs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187980 wart at kobold.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |wart at kobold.org ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-04 22:53 EST ------- A few quick notes: Please use the full url to the downloadable source archive in the Source0: tag. BuildRoot should match the Fedora Packaging Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines There's a typo in teh smp_mflags: ) should be _ Use 'install -m ...' instead of 'mv' when copying files to /usr/bin so that you can explicitly set the permissions. Remove the leading 'a' and trailing period from the Summary. Uncomment the 'rm' command in %clean. Make sure you have the same rm command at the start of the %install section. Doesn't build on x86_64: + make gcc -O2 -march=pentium2 -mtune=pentium2 -ggdb -Wall `sdl-config --cflags` -I./include -I./missions \ -DCDOGS_DATA_DIR=\"/usr/local/share/games/cdogs/\" -c cdogs.c cdogs.c:1: error: CPU you selected does not support x86-64 instruction set cdogs.c:1: error: CPU you selected does not support x86-64 instruction set make: *** [cdogs.o] Error 1 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.74551 (%build) In general, it looks like you should go over the packaging guidelines (linked above) again and make sure that your spec file conforms to the Fedora Extras standards. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 03:32:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 23:32:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181369] Review Request: libedit - The NetBSD Editline library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604050332.k353WuOM019493@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libedit - The NetBSD Editline library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181369 ------- Additional Comments From michael at knox.net.nz 2006-04-04 23:32 EST ------- done... Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 04:05:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 00:05:27 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187625] Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604050405.k3545RRC025875@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187625 ivazquez at ivazquez.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |ivazquez at ivazquez.net OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-04-05 00:05 EST ------- - First word of summary should be capitalized - Drop %{_datadir}/ices/* from %files as the previous line covers it - Put one newline between chnagelog entries -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 05:21:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 01:21:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187625] Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604050521.k355L0f2003917@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187625 ------- Additional Comments From rjune at bravegnuworld.com 2006-04-05 01:20 EST ------- Fixed all of those. ices-2.0.1-3.src.rpm: http://home.bravegnuworld.com/~rjune/rpm/SRPMS/ices-2.0.1-3.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 05:55:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 01:55:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187979] Review Request:
In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604050555.k355tHi6008455@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187979 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE OtherBugsDependingO|163776 | nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-05 01:55 EST ------- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 187980 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 05:55:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 01:55:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187980] Review Request: cdogs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604050555.k355tdY6008500@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cdogs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187980 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-05 01:55 EST ------- *** Bug 187979 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 06:15:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 02:15:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187706] Review Request: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604050615.k356FKwv010765@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187706 ------- Additional Comments From bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info 2006-04-05 02:15 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) > Answering Thorsten, a comment in the discussion last May said that if DMIX is > enabled by default it would be a reason to reconsider having alsa-oss. And DMIX > is enabled by default.. Well, that was last May. Is that comment still true? Maybe the alsa-developers in between found some other fancy ways that work automatically and without alsa-oss. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 07:17:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 03:17:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187964] Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604050717.k357HEwg019225@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187964 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-05 03:17 EST ------- Michael, If these games are only sgid because of a shared scoreboard file you should be able to easily skip the audit by just doing it as done with Ularn and others, first thing in main open the score file "r+" and immediatly drop any special rights. The license file is a bigger problem though. Whats dm? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 08:02:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 04:02:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187923] Review Request: blktool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604050802.k3582NYI031411@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: blktool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187923 tmraz at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tmraz at redhat.com 2006-04-05 04:02 EST ------- About the _sbindir - I didn't say that it shouldn't be redefined but that %{_sbindir} should be used instead of /sbin in the %install and %files sections probably. But I don't insist on that. Also probably the INSTALL file should be also removed from %doc because there are only the generic installation instructions. However these two above are only nitpicks so I leave it on you if you want to fix them. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 08:47:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 04:47:02 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172872] Review Request: sloccount In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604050847.k358l2GG008938@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sloccount https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172872 ------- Additional Comments From bnocera at redhat.com 2006-04-05 04:46 EST ------- That's actually what's recommended: # Set this to your C compiler, if it's not "gcc"; a likely alternative is "cc". # The "-Wall" option turns on warnings in gcc. gcc users might also want # to consider using "-Werror", which turns warnings into errors. CC=gcc -Wall Should be fixed in sloccount-2.26-4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From aportal at univ-montp2.fr Wed Apr 5 09:33:43 2006 From: aportal at univ-montp2.fr (Alain PORTAL) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 11:33:43 +0200 Subject: Multiple %configure Message-ID: <200604051133.46508.aportal@univ-montp2.fr> Hi, I want to try to solve this problem: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176026#c14 So, I should want to know if it is possible to do something like: if ( arch=x86_64 && dist=fc4 ) then %configure --with-qt-dir=/usr/lib64/qt-3.3/ else %configure fi Regards. Alain -- Les pages de manuel Linux en fran?ais : http://manpagesfr.free.fr -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: not available URL: From fedora at camperquake.de Wed Apr 5 09:18:48 2006 From: fedora at camperquake.de (Ralf Ertzinger) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 11:18:48 +0200 Subject: Multiple %configure In-Reply-To: <200604051133.46508.aportal@univ-montp2.fr> References: <200604051133.46508.aportal@univ-montp2.fr> Message-ID: <20060405111848.30ea14e1@soran.addix.net> Hi. On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 11:33:43 +0200, Alain PORTAL wrote: > So, I should want to know if it is possible to do something like: > > > then > %configure --with-qt-dir=/usr/lib64/qt-3.3/ > else > %configure > fi Maybe something like %configure \ if ( arch=x86_64 && dist=fc4 ) --with-qt-dir=... fi will do. I do not know the correct rpmbuild syntax, I am afraid. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 10:13:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 06:13:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182254] Review Request: SS5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051013.k35AD0OU026770@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SS5 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182254 ------- Additional Comments From matteo.ricchetti at libero.it 2006-04-05 06:12 EST ------- Done. Tell me if it works like you want. Thank you Bye. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 10:13:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 06:13:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182254] Review Request: SS5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051013.k35ADh4C026898@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SS5 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182254 ------- Additional Comments From matteo.ricchetti at libero.it 2006-04-05 06:13 EST ------- Done. Tell me if it works as you desire. Thank you Bye. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 10:36:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 06:36:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051036.k35AaKHS030763@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-05 06:35 EST ------- SPEC file: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodevelop.spec SRPM http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodevelop-0.10-1.src.rpm Bump to new version (less than 2 hours old!) with a small tweak to the spec file to accommodate Builds fine on x86_64. Not tested on x86 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From aportal at univ-montp2.fr Wed Apr 5 11:10:11 2006 From: aportal at univ-montp2.fr (Alain PORTAL) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 13:10:11 +0200 Subject: Multiple %configure In-Reply-To: <20060405111848.30ea14e1@soran.addix.net> References: <200604051133.46508.aportal@univ-montp2.fr> <20060405111848.30ea14e1@soran.addix.net> Message-ID: <200604051310.14141.aportal@univ-montp2.fr> Le Mercredi 5 Avril 2006 11:18, Ralf Ertzinger a ?crit : > Maybe something like > > %configure \ > if ( arch=x86_64 && dist=fc4 ) > --with-qt-dir=... > fi > > will do. I do not know the correct rpmbuild syntax, I am afraid. Thanks. Problem is I don't know either the correct syntax. Regards. Alain -- Les pages de manuel Linux en fran?ais : http://manpagesfr.free.fr -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 10:47:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 06:47:51 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176026] Review Request: pikdev:IDE for development of PICmicro based application (under Linux/KDE) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051047.k35AlpTU000529@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pikdev:IDE for development of PICmicro based application (under Linux/KDE) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176026 rdieter at math.unl.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rdieter at math.unl.edu ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-05 06:47 EST ------- Put this before %configure: unset QTDIR || : ; . /etc/profile.d/qt.sh export QTLIB=${QTDIR}/lib QTINC=${QTDIR}/include at least until bug #169132 is backported/released for FC-4. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From rdieter at math.unl.edu Wed Apr 5 11:04:56 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 06:04:56 -0500 Subject: Multiple %configure In-Reply-To: <200604051133.46508.aportal@univ-montp2.fr> References: <200604051133.46508.aportal@univ-montp2.fr> Message-ID: Alain PORTAL wrote: > I want to try to solve this problem: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176026#c14 > > So, I should want to know if it is possible to do something like: > > if ( arch=x86_64 && dist=fc4 ) > then > %configure --with-qt-dir=/usr/lib64/qt-3.3/ > else > %configure > fi Nah, better solution: (As I commented in the afformentioned bugzilla report): Put this before %configure: unset QTDIR || : ; . /etc/profile.d/qt.sh export QTLIB=${QTDIR}/lib QTINC=${QTDIR}/include at least until bug #169132 is backported/released for FC-4. -- Rex From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 5 10:56:07 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 12:56:07 +0200 Subject: Multiple %configure In-Reply-To: <200604051133.46508.aportal@univ-montp2.fr> References: <200604051133.46508.aportal@univ-montp2.fr> Message-ID: <20060405125607.d28061d4.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 11:33:43 +0200, Alain PORTAL wrote: > Hi, > > I want to try to solve this problem: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176026#c14 > > So, I should want to know if it is possible to do something like: > > if ( arch=x86_64 && dist=fc4 ) > then > %configure --with-qt-dir=/usr/lib64/qt-3.3/ > else > %configure > fi unset QTDIR || : ; . /etc/profile.d/qt.sh export QTLIB=${QTDIR}/lib QTINC=${QTDIR}/include %configure and if that doesn't help, use: unset QTDIR || : ; . /etc/profile.d/qt.sh export QTLIB=${QTDIR}/lib QTINC=${QTDIR}/include %configure --with-qt-dir=${QTDIR} From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 10:55:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 06:55:11 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187818] Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051055.k35AtBd4001849@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187818 ------- Additional Comments From roland.wolters at gmx.net 2006-04-05 06:55 EST ------- Ok, I followed your advices, and excluded the files in the files section. I also moved the library file from development to the main package. FYI: the %{_libdir}/kde3/* files have to be in the main package since they are providing plugins, it was my error to pack them into the devel package. The new files are here: Spec: http://www.personal.uni-jena.de/~p1woro/fedorarpms/ktorrent.spec SRPM: http://www.personal.uni-jena.de/~p1woro/fedorarpms/ktorrent-1.2-2.src.rpm The old spec file is renamed to ktorrent.spec.release1 One problem still left: when I now install/deinstall the package I get the error: > No theme index file in '/usr/share/apps/ktorrent/icons/hicolor'. > If you really want to create an icon cache here, use --ignore-theme-index. Any ideas? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 10:59:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 06:59:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187818] Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051059.k35AxbJK002725@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187818 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-05 06:59 EST ------- Replace touch --no-create %{_datadir}/apps/ktorrent/icons/hicolor || : gtk-update-icon-cache --quiet %{_datadir}/apps/ktorrent/icons/hicolor || : with touch --no-create %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor || : gtk-update-icon-cache --quiet %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor 2> /dev/null || : and you should be golden. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From aportal at univ-montp2.fr Wed Apr 5 11:55:43 2006 From: aportal at univ-montp2.fr (Alain PORTAL) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 13:55:43 +0200 Subject: Multiple %configure In-Reply-To: References: <200604051133.46508.aportal@univ-montp2.fr> Message-ID: <200604051355.46472.aportal@univ-montp2.fr> Le Mercredi 5 Avril 2006 13:04, Rex Dieter a ?crit : > Alain PORTAL wrote: > > I want to try to solve this problem: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176026#c14 > > > > So, I should want to know if it is possible to do something like: > > > > if ( arch=x86_64 && dist=fc4 ) > > then > > %configure --with-qt-dir=/usr/lib64/qt-3.3/ > > else > > %configure > > fi > > Nah, better solution: (As I commented in the afformentioned bugzilla > report): > > Put this before %configure: > unset QTDIR || : ; . /etc/profile.d/qt.sh > export QTLIB=${QTDIR}/lib QTINC=${QTDIR}/include Build OK :-) Really thanks to you and Michael! > at least until bug #169132 is backported/released for FC-4. This bug is closed for rawhide since 6 months. Is there an open bug for FC-4? Regards, Alain -- Les pages de manuel Linux en fran?ais : http://manpagesfr.free.fr -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 11:37:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 07:37:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176026] Review Request: pikdev:IDE for development of PICmicro based application (under Linux/KDE) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051137.k35BbkWw010345@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pikdev:IDE for development of PICmicro based application (under Linux/KDE) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176026 ------- Additional Comments From aportal at univ-montp2.fr 2006-04-05 07:37 EST ------- (In reply to comment #22) > Put this before %configure: > unset QTDIR || : ; . /etc/profile.d/qt.sh > export QTLIB=${QTDIR}/lib QTINC=${QTDIR}/include Work fine! Thanks. > at least until bug #169132 is backported/released for FC-4. This bug is closed in rawhide since 6 months Why not fixed in FC-4? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 11:50:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 07:50:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187913] Review Request: mysql-query-browser In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051150.k35BosDu012620@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mysql-query-browser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187913 ------- Additional Comments From dennis at ausil.us 2006-04-05 07:50 EST ------- Fix for fc4 it needs a slightly different configure switch Spec: http://ausil.us/packages/mysql-query-browser.spec SRPM: http://ausil.us/packages/mysql-query-browser-1.1.18-2.fc5.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 12:23:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 08:23:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188014] New: Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188014 Summary: Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: lukeross at sys3175.co.uk QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: pam_otpw.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://lukeross.name/pam_otpw-1.3-1.src.rpm Description: The pam_otpw package consists of the one-time-password generator otpw-gen plus a PAM module that provides auth and session stages. Login software extended this way will allow reasonably secure user authentication over insecure network lines. The user carries a password list on paper. The scheme is designed to be robust against theft of the paper list and race-for-the-last-letter attacks. Cryptographic hash values of the one-time passwords are stored for verification in the user's home directory. This is a follow-on from bugzilla #188002. This is my first Extras package, so needs sponsoring. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From rdieter at math.unl.edu Wed Apr 5 12:36:53 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 07:36:53 -0500 Subject: Multiple %configure In-Reply-To: <200604051355.46472.aportal@univ-montp2.fr> References: <200604051133.46508.aportal@univ-montp2.fr> <200604051355.46472.aportal@univ-montp2.fr> Message-ID: Alain PORTAL wrote: > Le Mercredi 5 Avril 2006 13:04, Rex Dieter a ?crit : >>Put this before %configure: >>unset QTDIR || : ; . /etc/profile.d/qt.sh >>export QTLIB=${QTDIR}/lib QTINC=${QTDIR}/include > Build OK :-) > Really thanks to you and Michael! Excellent! >>at least until bug #169132 is backported/released for FC-4. > > > This bug is closed for rawhide since 6 months. > Is there an open bug for FC-4? No, not that I'm aware. Maybe someone should nag than at redhat.com to (finally) push an FC-4 update? OK, I'll do it... (-: -- Rex From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 12:53:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 08:53:34 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187964] Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051253.k35CrYuQ023293@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187964 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-05 08:53 EST ------- Yes, these are setgid for shared scoreboard files. Most of the games aren't setgid, so only a few need to be checked. From the cursory glance that I made it seems that ~10 of them will require a little work. dm is a tool to let a system administrator control access to the various games. You can move a game binary to %[_libdir} and make a link from dm to it's old name in %{_bindir}. Once that's done then you can use the dm configuration files to control the times during the day that the program can be run, who is allowed to run it, or disable access to it altogether. It turns out there is a license file that describes the license text that is included with each game. That should work well enough. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 13:20:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 09:20:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176026] Review Request: pikdev:IDE for development of PICmicro based application (under Linux/KDE) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051320.k35DK3On027628@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pikdev:IDE for development of PICmicro based application (under Linux/KDE) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176026 ------- Additional Comments From dwmw2 at redhat.com 2006-04-05 09:19 EST ------- See comment in bug #185615. The PPC build is trivial to fix -- please do so. And please pay a _little_ more attention before deciding to exclude architectures. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 13:30:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 09:30:41 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051330.k35DUfWg029386@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From anmar at gmx.net 2006-04-05 09:30 EST ------- The #9 rpm won't build without: mono-data-postgresql, mono-data-oracle, mono-data-sybase and mono-nunit. And monodevelop won't run at least without mono-nunit. There are also two more typos: 51c51 < %{__install} -c -m 644 Core/src/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui.addin.xml %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.CoreGui..addin.xml --- > %{__install} -c -m 644 Core/src/MonoDevelop.Core/MonoDevelop.Core.addin.xml %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Core.addin.xml 54c54 < %{__install} -c -m 644 Core/src/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui.addin.xml %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui.xml --- > %{__install} -c -m 644 Core/src/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui.addin.xml %{monodevdir}/AddIns/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui.addin.xml -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 13:38:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 09:38:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051338.k35DcLa9031415@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-05 09:38 EST ------- SPEC file: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodevelop.spec SRPM http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodevelop-0.10-2.src.rpm Fixes and buildreqs added. Thank Angel :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 13:44:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 09:44:10 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187818] Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051344.k35DiABQ032441@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187818 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-05 09:43 EST ------- This doesn't look right in %files: %{_datadir}/applications/kde/ktorrent.desktop %{_datadir}/applications/ktorrent.desktop %{_datadir}/applnk/Internet/ktorrent.desktop You only need *one* .desktop file. Change: /usr/bin/desktop-file-install --vendor="" \ --dir=${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_datadir}/applications \ --add-category=X-Fedora \ %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/kde/ktorrent.desktop to rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/applnk/Internet/ktorrent.desktop /usr/bin/desktop-file-install --vendor="" \ --dir=${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_datadir}/applications/kde \ --add-category=X-Fedora \ %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/kde/ktorrent.desktop -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 14:06:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 10:06:48 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051406.k35E6lBJ003933@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From anmar at gmx.net 2006-04-05 10:06 EST ------- The first typo is already there. You've removed the double dot, but the real issue is that that line is handling MonoDevelop.Core.Gui/MonoDevelop.Core.Gui.addin.xml while it should be about MonoDevelop.Core/MonoDevelop.Core.addin.xml. Core.Gui.* is already handled a few lines below in the spec :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 14:26:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 10:26:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188014] Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051426.k35EQ0Cx007648@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188014 ------- Additional Comments From tmraz at redhat.com 2006-04-05 10:25 EST ------- rpmlint complaints on the srpm: W: pam_otpw strange-permission otpw-1.3.tar.gz 0600 W: pam_otpw strange-permission pam_otpw.spec 0600 W: pam_otpw buildprereq-use pam-devel (Use 644 perms and BuildRequires) rpmlint complaints on the built rpm: W: pam_otpw unstripped-binary-or-object /lib/security/pam_otpw.so E: pam_otpw library-not-linked-against-libc /lib/security/pam_otpw.so The Makefile must be patched so it calls gcc as a linker for the pam_otpw.so Also the CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" and LDFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" should be added to the spec when calling make. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From veillard at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 14:45:19 2006 From: veillard at redhat.com (Daniel Veillard) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 10:45:19 -0400 Subject: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core In-Reply-To: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> References: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060405144519.GB22325@redhat.com> On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 12:56:10PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > We're intending to remove the GNOME1/GTK1 stack from Core soon. > Initially, the following will go away: > > GConf > Guppi > ORBit > gal > gnome-libs > gnome-print > gtkhtml > libgal23 > libglade > libgnomeprint15 > oaf > > Later, these will follow: > > glib > gtk+ > gdk-pixbuf > imlib I don't want to look painful, but can't we get rid of libxml1 too ? And any depending app should really go to Extras IMHO... Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | Red Hat http://redhat.com/ veillard at redhat.com | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ From rdieter at math.unl.edu Wed Apr 5 15:05:28 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 10:05:28 -0500 Subject: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core In-Reply-To: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> References: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: Bill Nottingham wrote: > We're intending to remove the GNOME1/GTK1 stack from Core soon. > Initially, the following will go away: ... > Later, these will follow: > > glib > gtk+ > Looking at Extras, the following things require glib/gtk+: ... > gsview > If you own one of these, glib and gtk+ will need a maintainer.... Heck, if no-one else offers, I'd be willing to maintain glib/gtk+ (those look easy enough). my incentive: I maintain the dependant gsview. -- Rex From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 15:14:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 11:14:50 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188014] Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051514.k35FEo9k019104@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188014 ------- Additional Comments From lukeross at sys3175.co.uk 2006-04-05 11:14 EST ------- Updated, please try http://lukeross.name/pam_otpw-1.3-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 5 15:39:54 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 11:39:54 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060405153954.F29817FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 2 denyhosts-2.3-1.fc3 tinyfugue-5.0-0.4.b7.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 5 15:40:10 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 11:40:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060405154010.9A4957FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 7 denyhosts-2.3-1.fc4 exim-4.61-1.fc4 exim-doc-4.61-1.fc4 k3b-extras-0.12.14-4.fc4 mysql-administrator-1.1.6-3.fc4 pikdev-0.8.4-8.fc4 tinyfugue-5.0-0.4.b7.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 5 15:40:37 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 11:40:37 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060405154037.E48E47FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 8 denyhosts-2.3-1.fc5 exim-4.61-1.fc5 exim-doc-4.61-1.fc5 gjots2-2.3.4-4.fc5 k3b-extras-0.12.14-4.fc5 mysql-administrator-1.1.6-3.fc5 tinyfugue-5.0-0.4.b7.fc5 xemacs-21.4.19-4.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From i.pilcher at comcast.net Wed Apr 5 15:40:31 2006 From: i.pilcher at comcast.net (Ian Pilcher) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 10:40:31 -0500 Subject: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core In-Reply-To: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> References: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: Bill Nottingham wrote: > We're intending to remove the GNOME1/GTK1 stack from Core soon. > Initially, the following will go away: > > GConf > Guppi > ORBit > gal > gnome-libs > gnome-print > gtkhtml > libgal23 > libglade > libgnomeprint15 > oaf > You do know that GnuCash depends on these libraries, right? -- ======================================================================== Ian Pilcher i.pilcher at comcast.net ======================================================================== From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 5 15:42:41 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 11:42:41 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060405154241.EE1017FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 12 blktool-4-3 denyhosts-2.3-1.fc6 edb-1.0.5.007-1.fc6 exim-4.61-1.fc6 exim-doc-4.61-1.fc6 gdl-0.9-0.pre.fc6 k3b-extras-0.12.14-4.fc6 libopts-27.1-6.fc6 mysql-administrator-1.1.6-3.fc6 sloccount-2.26-4 tinyfugue-5.0-0.4.b7.fc6 xchat-gnome-0.11-2.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 5 15:45:04 2006 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 21:15:04 +0530 Subject: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core In-Reply-To: References: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1144251904.24151.106.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 10:40 -0500, Ian Pilcher wrote: > Bill Nottingham wrote: > > We're intending to remove the GNOME1/GTK1 stack from Core soon. > > Initially, the following will go away: > > > > GConf > > Guppi > > ORBit > > gal > > gnome-libs > > gnome-print > > gtkhtml > > libgal23 > > libglade > > libgnomeprint15 > > oaf > > > > You do know that GnuCash depends on these libraries, right? Not anymore. See rawhide report. Rahul From micwise at bellsouth.net Wed Apr 5 15:44:45 2006 From: micwise at bellsouth.net (micwise at bellsouth.net) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 10:44:45 -0500 Subject: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core Message-ID: <20060405154445.BQYX5353.ibm70aec.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> > > From: Ian Pilcher > Date: 2006/04/05 Wed AM 10:40:31 CDT > To: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com > Subject: Re: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core > > Bill Nottingham wrote: > > We're intending to remove the GNOME1/GTK1 stack from Core soon. > > Initially, the following will go away: > > > > GConf > > Guppi > > ORBit > > gal > > gnome-libs > > gnome-print > > gtkhtml > > libgal23 > > libglade > > libgnomeprint15 > > oaf > > > > You do know that GnuCash depends on these libraries, right? > GnuCash 1.8.x does. GnuCash 1.9.3 which is in development does not. I believe these are being removed from development. Michael -- > ======================================================================== > Ian Pilcher i.pilcher at comcast.net > ======================================================================== > > -- > fedora-extras-list mailing list > fedora-extras-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list > From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 15:42:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 11:42:47 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188014] Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051542.k35FgldX026764@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188014 ------- Additional Comments From tmraz at redhat.com 2006-04-05 11:42 EST ------- It still isn't quite right because you must call the make as: make CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" LDFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" instead of exporting the CFLAGS and LDFLAGS first. And the Makefile should be patched to contain $(LDFLAGS) in all linker commands. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 15:54:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 11:54:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187818] Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051554.k35FsaGl029649@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187818 ------- Additional Comments From roland.wolters at gmx.net 2006-04-05 11:54 EST ------- Thanks again for the helpful comments, I made the requested changes, as usual the files can be found here: Spec: http://www.personal.uni-jena.de/~p1woro/fedorarpms/ktorrent.spec SRPM: http://www.personal.uni-jena.de/~p1woro/fedorarpms/ktorrent-1.2-3.src.rpm The old spec file has been changed to ktorrent.spec.release2 if you want to compare it. rpmlint had one warning since there is one development file in the main package (see also above): > W: ktorrent devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libktorrent.so Everything else is running without problems. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From i.pilcher at comcast.net Wed Apr 5 16:12:24 2006 From: i.pilcher at comcast.net (Ian Pilcher) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 11:12:24 -0500 Subject: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core In-Reply-To: <1144251904.24151.106.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> References: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <1144251904.24151.106.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> Message-ID: Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > Not anymore. See rawhide report. > Well that's one way to ensure that a beta gets tested. I'm not sure how I feel about trusting 5 years of financial records to it, however. -- ======================================================================== Ian Pilcher i.pilcher at comcast.net ======================================================================== From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 5 16:44:21 2006 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 22:14:21 +0530 Subject: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core In-Reply-To: References: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <1144251904.24151.106.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1144255461.24151.115.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 11:12 -0500, Ian Pilcher wrote: > Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > > > Not anymore. See rawhide report. > > > > Well that's one way to ensure that a beta gets tested. I'm not sure how > I feel about trusting 5 years of financial records to it, however. Why would anyone want to trust any data to a development version of a distribution? Its meant for testing and thats exactly what is happening. Rahul From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 16:52:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 12:52:05 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187706] Review Request: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051652.k35Gq5vU009307@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187706 ------- Additional Comments From michel.salim at gmail.com 2006-04-05 12:51 EST ------- It is still true, as far as I can tell. Try ogg123 -d oss test.ogg and, while it's playing, ogg123 -d alsa test.ogg. This will fail. If the first ogg123 uses -d alsa, then both play fine. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 16:53:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 12:53:10 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187706] Review Request: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051653.k35GrAaN009481@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187706 ------- Additional Comments From michel.salim at gmail.com 2006-04-05 12:52 EST ------- If someone is clever enough to work out how to aoss a 32-bit OSS application running on x86_64, that'd be even neater. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From i.pilcher at comcast.net Wed Apr 5 17:04:51 2006 From: i.pilcher at comcast.net (Ian Pilcher) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 12:04:51 -0500 Subject: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core In-Reply-To: <1144255461.24151.115.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> References: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <1144251904.24151.106.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <1144255461.24151.115.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> Message-ID: Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > Why would anyone want to trust any data to a development version of a > distribution? Its meant for testing and thats exactly what is > happening. > Touch? (although we both know that the reality is more complex than than). -- ======================================================================== Ian Pilcher i.pilcher at comcast.net ======================================================================== From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 5 17:12:38 2006 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 22:42:38 +0530 Subject: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core In-Reply-To: References: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <1144251904.24151.106.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <1144255461.24151.115.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1144257158.24151.119.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 12:04 -0500, Ian Pilcher wrote: > Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > > > Why would anyone want to trust any data to a development version of a > > distribution? Its meant for testing and thats exactly what is > > happening. > > > > Touch? (although we both know that the reality is more complex than > than). If you are going to use rawhide to do accounting, then you are very much on the wrong path and thats the only reality that exists. Rahul From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 5 17:39:33 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 17:39:33 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-05 Message-ID: <20060405173933.19372.57428@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch wine-cms 0.9.11-1.fc3.i386 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 5 17:39:42 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 17:39:42 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-05 Message-ID: <20060405173942.19376.18329@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch wine-cms 0.9.11-1.fc4.i386 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 5 17:39:53 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 17:39:53 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-05 Message-ID: <20060405173953.19381.96729@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 5 17:40:08 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 17:40:08 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-05 Message-ID: <20060405174008.19386.47816@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 edb-gtk 1.0.5.005-1.fc5.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 kdemultimedia-extras 6:3.5.1-7.fc6.i386 rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc edb-gtk 1.0.5.005-1.fc5.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc kdemultimedia-extras 6:3.5.1-7.fc6.ppc rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 edb-gtk 1.0.5.005-1.fc5.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 kdemultimedia-extras 6:3.5.1-7.fc6.x86_64 rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: ivazquez AT ivazquez.net package: edb-gtk - 1.0.5.005-1.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: edb = 0:1.0.5.005-1.fc5 package: edb-gtk - 1.0.5.005-1.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: edb = 0:1.0.5.005-1.fc5 package: edb-gtk - 1.0.5.005-1.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: edb = 0:1.0.5.005-1.fc5 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: gauret AT free.fr package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113 package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113()(64bit) package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: tcallawa AT redhat.com package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0()(64bit) libglade gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: rdieter AT math.unl.edu package: kdemultimedia-extras - 6:3.5.1-7.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: kdemultimedia = 6:3.5.1 package: kdemultimedia-extras - 6:3.5.1-7.fc6.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: kdemultimedia = 6:3.5.1 package: kdemultimedia-extras - 6:3.5.1-7.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: kdemultimedia = 6:3.5.1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: matthias AT rpmforge.net package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 From i.pilcher at comcast.net Wed Apr 5 18:26:48 2006 From: i.pilcher at comcast.net (Ian Pilcher) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 13:26:48 -0500 Subject: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core In-Reply-To: <1144257158.24151.119.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> References: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <1144251904.24151.106.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <1144255461.24151.115.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <1144257158.24151.119.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> Message-ID: Rahul Sundaram wrote: > If you are going to use rawhide to do accounting, then you are very much > on the wrong path and thats the only reality that exists. Miscommunication. I thought that you were referring to Fedora. My comment about running a beta version of GnuCash was looking ahead to FC6. Given the history, I think it's *really* unlikely that GnuCash 2.0 will be out 5 months from now. -- ======================================================================== Ian Pilcher i.pilcher at comcast.net ======================================================================== From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 5 18:38:10 2006 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 00:08:10 +0530 Subject: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core In-Reply-To: References: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <1144251904.24151.106.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <1144255461.24151.115.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <1144257158.24151.119.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1144262290.24151.124.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 13:26 -0500, Ian Pilcher wrote: > Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > If you are going to use rawhide to do accounting, then you are very much > > on the wrong path and thats the only reality that exists. > > Miscommunication. I thought that you were referring to Fedora. My > comment about running a beta version of GnuCash was looking ahead to > FC6. Given the history, I think it's *really* unlikely that GnuCash 2.0 > will be out 5 months from now. We can revert back if its not stable enough. We have enough time to test and decide on that. Sometimes beta releases are much stable than previous "stable" releases. Dovecot developers even recommend using the latest beta for example. Gnucash development pace or atleast release pace has been slow in the past but you can never predict the future. Rahul From kevin.kofler at chello.at Wed Apr 5 19:08:41 2006 From: kevin.kofler at chello.at (Kevin Kofler) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 19:08:41 +0000 (UTC) Subject: GSView licensing Message-ID: GSView (currently in Extras) is licensed under the AFPL: http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~ghost/gsview/LICENCE According to the FSF, this is NOT a Free Software license: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#NonFreeSoftwareLicense In particular, it essentially prohibits commercial distribution. In the author's own words: "AFPL Ghostscript comes with a licence that is more restrictive than the GNU Licence; in particular, it restricts the distribution of AFPL Ghostscript in commercial contexts.", and looking at the license (as well as the FSF's interpretation of it which appears to match mine), "restricts" appears to be an understatement. Each time somebody brought up that issue, the consensus was that non-commercial-only licenses are not acceptable in Extras (and I agree with that, Fedora aims to contain Free and Open Source software only, non-commercial-only software is neither). I also don't see why GSView is needed in Extras at all, given that: * there are alternatives (with less restrictive licensing) already in Core or Extras (e.g. Evince and KGhostview), * it uses the obsolete GTK+ 1.2, * repoquery --whatrequires gsview returns nothing. (At one point, LyX had a spurious dependency on gsview, I'm glad this has been fixed.) So IMHO, GSView should never have been accepted into Extras and should be pulled from Extras. Kevin Kofler From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 19:08:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 15:08:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186813] Review Request: njam - Maze-game where you must eat all the dots and avoid the badguys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051908.k35J8LWO004252@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njam - Maze-game where you must eat all the dots and avoid the badguys https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186813 e0126505 at student.tuwien.ac.at changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |e0126505 at student.tuwien.ac.a | |t ------- Additional Comments From e0126505 at student.tuwien.ac.at 2006-04-05 15:08 EST ------- using this package it is impossible to create new levels using the built-in level-editor well, you can create them, but they aren't saved although there is is no error message -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From rdieter at math.unl.edu Wed Apr 5 19:19:30 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 14:19:30 -0500 Subject: gsview's AFPL licensing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Kevin Kofler wrote: > GSView (currently in Extras) is licensed under the AFPL: > http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~ghost/gsview/LICENCE > > According to the FSF, this is NOT a Free Software license: > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#NonFreeSoftwareLicense > > In particular, it essentially prohibits commercial distribution. In the > author's own words: "AFPL Ghostscript comes with a licence that is more > restrictive than the GNU Licence; in particular, it restricts the distribution > of AFPL Ghostscript in commercial contexts.", and looking at the license (as > well as the FSF's interpretation of it which appears to match mine), > "restricts" appears to be an understatement. Each time somebody brought up that > issue, the consensus was that non-commercial-only licenses are not acceptable > in Extras (and I agree with that, Fedora aims to contain Free and Open Source > software only, non-commercial-only software is neither). Eek. You make a very good point. It may have been marginally OK when it was orginally submitted back in the fedora.us days, but it almost certainly is not OK for inclusion now. > I also don't see why GSView is needed in Extras at all, given that: > * there are alternatives (with less restrictive licensing)... > * it uses the obsolete GTK+ 1.2, > * repoquery --whatrequires gsview returns nothing.... This bit is irrelavent. These additional criteria are not required for including something in Extras. -- Rex From kevin.kofler at chello.at Wed Apr 5 19:23:33 2006 From: kevin.kofler at chello.at (Kevin Kofler) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 19:23:33 +0000 (UTC) Subject: gsview's AFPL licensing References: Message-ID: > > I also don't see why GSView is needed in Extras at all, given that: > > * there are alternatives (with less restrictive licensing)... > > * it uses the obsolete GTK+ 1.2, > > * repoquery --whatrequires gsview returns nothing.... > > This bit is irrelavent. These additional criteria are not required for > including something in Extras. True, Extras does not have a policy against unneeded obsolete software. ;-) It does have a policy against non-Free software though. Kevin Kofler From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 19:58:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 15:58:11 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186813] Review Request: njam - Maze-game where you must eat all the dots and avoid the badguys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604051958.k35JwBJM014681@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njam - Maze-game where you must eat all the dots and avoid the badguys https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186813 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-05 15:57 EST ------- e0126505 at student.tuwien.ac.at 1) Thanks for reporting this 2) Please use a Real Name as Real Name or atleast an alias, so people have some way of addressing you in comments 3) Please report this in a seperate bug where it belongs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 20:00:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 16:00:08 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186813] Review Request: njam - Maze-game where you must eat all the dots and avoid the badguys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604052000.k35K08xg015036@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njam - Maze-game where you must eat all the dots and avoid the badguys https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186813 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-05 15:59 EST ------- did you try pressing s to save it or a for save as before exiting the editor? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 20:34:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 16:34:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186813] Review Request: njam - Maze-game where you must eat all the dots and avoid the badguys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604052034.k35KYnKR021794@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njam - Maze-game where you must eat all the dots and avoid the badguys https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186813 ------- Additional Comments From e0126505 at student.tuwien.ac.at 2006-04-05 16:34 EST ------- >Please report this in a seperate bug where it belongs. #188078 >did you try pressing s to save it or a for save as before exiting the editor? both methods don't work...well they can't possibly work since the "levels" directory is root-owned?! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Wed Apr 5 21:04:53 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 23:04:53 +0200 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-05 In-Reply-To: <20060405173942.19376.18329@faldor.intranet> References: <20060405173942.19376.18329@faldor.intranet> Message-ID: <20060405230453.52fb2d99@alkaid.a.lan> On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 17:39:42 -0000 Michael Schwendt wrote: > wine-cms 0.9.11-1.fc4.i386 Would have been great to know about this _before_ lcms was pushed... - Andreas -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 173 5803043 | mail preferred -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 21:13:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 17:13:19 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188081] New: Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188081 Summary: Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/pipenightdreams SRPM Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/pipenightdreams-0.10.0-1.src.rpm Description: PipeNightDreams is a game similar to the classic PipeDream. It has 25 levels with increasing difficulty, and you can create your own by just editing text files. It has a lot of cool graphics, score, lives, required pipes per level and an easy and fast interface. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 21:15:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 17:15:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188083] New: Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188083 Summary: Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/pipenightdreams SRPM Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/pipenightdreams-0.10.0-1.src.rpm Description: PipeNightDreams is a game similar to the classic PipeDream. It has 25 levels with increasing difficulty, and you can create your own by just editing text files. It has a lot of cool graphics, score, lives, required pipes per level and an easy and fast interface. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 21:20:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 17:20:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188081] Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604052120.k35LKdam001069@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188081 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-05 17:20 EST ------- *** Bug 188083 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 21:19:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 17:19:48 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188083] Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604052119.k35LJmlO000830@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188083 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-05 17:19 EST ------- Oops, sorry about the dup, bugzilla was so slow I thought it hung. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 188081 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 5 21:48:54 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 23:48:54 +0200 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-05 In-Reply-To: <20060405230453.52fb2d99@alkaid.a.lan> References: <20060405173942.19376.18329@faldor.intranet> <20060405230453.52fb2d99@alkaid.a.lan> Message-ID: <20060405234854.b4773cc3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 23:04:53 +0200, Andreas Bierfert wrote: > > wine-cms 0.9.11-1.fc4.i386 > > > Would have been great to know about this _before_ lcms was pushed... lcms is unchanged since 20-Jan-2006 in FE4, so this dep breakage most likely is due to wine i386 being copied to x86_64 From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 5 22:33:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 18:33:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188090] New: Review Request: gpsd Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188090 Summary: Review Request: gpsd Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: matt at truch.net QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://matt.truch.net/fedora/gpsd.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://matt.truch.net/fedora/gpsd-2.32-1.src.rpm Description: gpsd is a service daemon that mediates access to a GPS sensor connected to the host computer by serial or USB interface, making its data on the location/course/velocity of the sensor available to be queried on TCP port 2947 of the host computer. With gpsd, multiple GPS client applications (such as navigational and wardriving software) can share access to a GPS without contention or loss of data. Also, gpsd responds to queries with a format that is substantially easier to parse than NMEA 0183. Thanks in advance for the review! Note, I based the rpm on the spec that comes with gpsd, although I made it conform to fedora-extras requirements as much as possible. rpmlint complains about: E: gpsd-clients only-non-binary-in-usr-lib And this is due to 'config' files placed in /usr/lib/X11/app-defaults/ as per how the original rpm spec did things. The programs run fine (using the same defaults) without these files, so perhaps I should not include them? This is new territory for me, so I thought I'd check first. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 00:56:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 20:56:11 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177483] Review Request: subversion-api-docs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604060056.k360uBV2005914@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: subversion-api-docs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177483 ------- Additional Comments From bojan at rexursive.com 2006-04-05 20:55 EST ------- Again, sorry about the delay. I'm finding it hard these days to be on the right machine at the right time to finish this. Hopefully in the next week or so I'll move to next steps... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 02:20:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 22:20:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188105] New: Review Request: torque Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 Summary: Review Request: torque Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: garrick at usc.edu QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~garrick/torque.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~garrick/torque-2.1.0p0-0.1.200604051756.src.rpm Description: **This is my first package for FC, I'm looking for a sponsor** TORQUE (Tera-scale Open-source Resource and QUEue manager) is a resource manager providing control over batch jobs and distributed compute nodes. TORQUE is based on OpenPBS version 2.3.12 and incorporates scalability, fault tolerance, and feature extension patches provided by USC, NCSA, OSC, the U.S. Dept of Energy, Sandia, PNNL, U of Buffalo, TeraGrid, and many other leading edge HPC organizations. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From notting at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 02:39:39 2006 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 22:39:39 -0400 Subject: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core In-Reply-To: References: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <1144251904.24151.106.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <1144255461.24151.115.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <1144257158.24151.119.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060406023939.GB10416@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Ian Pilcher (i.pilcher at comcast.net) said: > Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > If you are going to use rawhide to do accounting, then you are very much > > on the wrong path and thats the only reality that exists. > > Miscommunication. I thought that you were referring to Fedora. My > comment about running a beta version of GnuCash was looking ahead to > FC6. Given the history, I think it's *really* unlikely that GnuCash 2.0 > will be out 5 months from now. The last I saw the release schedule for gnucash, it was going to be released well before any time for FC6. I could be wrong, though. If it's not done, we can revert it. Bill From notting at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 02:40:33 2006 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 22:40:33 -0400 Subject: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core In-Reply-To: <20060405144519.GB22325@redhat.com> References: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20060405144519.GB22325@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060406024033.GC10416@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Daniel Veillard (veillard at redhat.com) said: > I don't want to look painful, but can't we get rid of libxml1 too ? > And any depending app should really go to Extras IMHO... Actaully, it looks like, with the above removals, nothing in Core requires libxml. Extras requires are in: Gtk-Perl R-gnomeGUI (probably via libglade1). Any volunteers? :) Bill From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 07:05:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 03:05:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186391] Review Request: 855resolution - Change video bios resolutions on laptops with Intel graphic chipsets In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604060705.k3675sS8003289@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: 855resolution - Change video bios resolutions on laptops with Intel graphic chipsets https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186391 bnocera at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bnocera at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From bnocera at redhat.com 2006-04-06 03:05 EST ------- That would be obsoleted by Eric Anholt's work in x.org: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg/2006-April/014555.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 07:14:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 03:14:48 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179802] Review Request: seamonkey In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604060714.k367Emek004583@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: seamonkey https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179802 ------- Additional Comments From kengert at redhat.com 2006-04-06 03:14 EST ------- 4 weeks passed since I made the previous comment. Could you please approve, or do you want me to make further changes? Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From veillard at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 09:13:31 2006 From: veillard at redhat.com (Daniel Veillard) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 05:13:31 -0400 Subject: gtk+ stuff moving out of Core In-Reply-To: <20060406024033.GC10416@devserv.devel.redhat.com> References: <20060404165610.GA32313@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20060405144519.GB22325@redhat.com> <20060406024033.GC10416@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060406091331.GH22325@redhat.com> On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 10:40:33PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Daniel Veillard (veillard at redhat.com) said: > > I don't want to look painful, but can't we get rid of libxml1 too ? > > And any depending app should really go to Extras IMHO... > > Actaully, it looks like, with the above removals, nothing in > Core requires libxml. Extras requires are in: /me bounces all around ... it only took 5 years ! > Gtk-Perl > R-gnomeGUI > (probably via libglade1). > > Any volunteers? :) Please someone takes this off my plate :-) Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | Red Hat http://redhat.com/ veillard at redhat.com | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 09:31:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 05:31:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186391] Review Request: 855resolution - Change video bios resolutions on laptops with Intel graphic chipsets In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604060931.k369VKsp004191@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: 855resolution - Change video bios resolutions on laptops with Intel graphic chipsets https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186391 ------- Additional Comments From matthias at rpmforge.net 2006-04-06 05:31 EST ------- Indeed, but until work is finished and an X update with that included pushed into FC4 and FC5, it's the only working solution for many users to get the native resolution of their laptop working. If no one seems to want to review the package, I have no problem in leaving it in freshrpms until X "does the right thing" on those Intel chipsets. I'll leave the request open for now, if anyone wants to step up (it's a fairly easy review). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 11:11:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 07:11:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188081] Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061111.k36BBHLv024479@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188081 ------- Additional Comments From joost at cnoc.nl 2006-04-06 07:11 EST ------- I've reviewed the package and have one thing that should be fixed and one question. What should be fixed is the difference in MD5-sum from the sources. And then I have to review again. The question is about the %post and %postun scripts. Where are these for, are they really necessary? And don't they need a requirement? Review for pipenightdreams Must-items - RPMLint doesn't give any output - Package nams is according to the packaging name guidelines - Spec file name matches the base package name - Package meet the packaging guidelines - License is GPL - License matches actual license - License file is included in %doc - SPEC file is in American English - Very clear specfile - MUST FIX: The source in the provided SRPM has the following MD5-sum: 143995af21bad76a3b4dad46bcd8670f while the upstream source file http://www.libsdl.org/projects/pipenightdreams/packages/pipenightdreams-0.10.0.tar.gz has as MD5-sum: f22f23649852f54cca43de775e691de6 Those doesn't match. Am I wrong, or did you use a different source file? - Package successfully compiles and build into a binary package on i386 - I'm not aware of any problems on other Architectures - The package doesn't contain buildrequirements which are on the exception list - All necessary buildrequirements are listed - No problems with locales - There are no shares library files in the dynamic linker's default path, so no ldconfig required - The package isn't relocatable - The package own all directories that it creates - There are no duplicates in the %files listing - Permissions are ok - The %clean section containt rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - Macros are used consistently - The code contains permissable content. The game-levels and some pictures. - There is not much documentation what should go in a subpackage - The files in the %doc aren't required for normal operation - No header files or static libraries - No .pc files - No library .so files - The -devel package requires the base package - There are no libtool archives in the package - There is a desktop-file which get properly installed Should-items - The package builds in mock - The packages works ;) Although the game is not as easy as I thought. My girlfriend's gonna like it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 11:56:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 07:56:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188081] Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061156.k36Bu7ih032415@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188081 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-06 07:55 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > The question is about the %post and %postun scripts. Where are these for, are > they really necessary? And don't they need a requirement? This is used to update the gtk icon cache to speed up loading the icons for the menu and other applications. The .desktop file uses an icon that is placed in this cache. According to the ScriptletSnippets page, no dependencies should be added for this standard scriptlet snippet: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ScriptletSnippets > - MUST FIX: > The source in the provided SRPM has the following MD5-sum: > 143995af21bad76a3b4dad46bcd8670f > while the upstream source file > http://www.libsdl.org/projects/pipenightdreams/packages/pipenightdreams-0.10.0.tar.gz > has as MD5-sum: > f22f23649852f54cca43de775e691de6 > Those doesn't match. Am I wrong, or did you use a different source file? Interestingly enough, if you do a diff on the upstream and srpm tarballs, it does claim that they differ. The upstream tarball is 7 bytes smaller. But if you untar both tarballs and do a diff on their sources, they are identical. ?? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 12:03:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 08:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188138] New: Review Request: mod_ntlm_winbind - NTLM authentication for the Apache web server using winbind daemon Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188138 Summary: Review Request: mod_ntlm_winbind - NTLM authentication for the Apache web server using winbind daemon Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: dmitry at butskoy.name QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec: http://dmitry.butskoy.name/mod_ntlm_winbind/mod_ntlm_winbind.spec SRPM: http://dmitry.butskoy.name/mod_ntlm_winbind/mod_ntlm_winbind-20060328-1.spec Description: mod_ntlm_winbind module allows authentication and authorisation over the Web against a Windows NT/AD domain controllers, using Samba on the same machine Apache is running on. It uses "ntlm_auth" helper utility to operate with local winbindd(8) daemon, which are standard parts of the Samba distribution. The same way Squid does NTLM authentication now. Additional info: There are already various implementations of NTLM auth for both Apache1 and Apache2. Unlike that, mod_ntlm_winbind is a "Samba upstream" implementation, specially designed for this purpose. Too long time Apache1 was supported only. Last week support for Apache2 has appeared too, therefore it is possible now to use this module in Fedora. There is no any source tarball. All the code (three files) is placed under appropriate directory on some FTP servers. Additionally, CVS access is possible too. There is no version yet. (Perhaps sometime in the future it can become a part of Samba distribution?). Therefore I use YYYYMMDD as a version, with epoch "0". (It is the same way as was used for mod_auth_mysql module in the past). Not sure whether it is good. There is no any docs, all needed words are present as a comment in the config file. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 12:05:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 08:05:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188138] Review Request: mod_ntlm_winbind - NTLM authentication for the Apache web server using winbind daemon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061205.k36C5N1b001771@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mod_ntlm_winbind - NTLM authentication for the Apache web server using winbind daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188138 ------- Additional Comments From dmitry at butskoy.name 2006-04-06 08:05 EST ------- Typo, Spec: http://dmitry.butskoy.name/mod_ntlm_winbind/mod_ntlm_winbind.spec SRPM: http://dmitry.butskoy.name/mod_ntlm_winbind/mod_ntlm_winbind-20060328-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 12:14:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 08:14:06 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186391] Review Request: 855resolution - Change video bios resolutions on laptops with Intel graphic chipsets In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061214.k36CE64L003351@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: 855resolution - Change video bios resolutions on laptops with Intel graphic chipsets https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186391 ------- Additional Comments From dwmw2 at redhat.com 2006-04-06 08:13 EST ------- Now we have modular X, we don't need "an X update with that included". We only need an updated xf86-driver-i810 package. You could build one of those and make it available for FC5 in the meantime, and perhaps that would help to accelerate its availability as a real update for Fedora? Poking around in binary-only drivers (which is basically what the BIOS is) isn't really something I'm happy about doing in Fedora packages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 12:18:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 08:18:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188081] Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061218.k36CIPiG004003@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188081 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-06 08:18 EST ------- I took the tarbal in my SRPM from the upstream SRPM: [hans at guest-dhcp-088 ~]$ rpm -ivh Desktop/pipenightdreams-0.10.0-1.src.rpm 1:pipenightdreams warning: user walde does not exist - using root warning: group walde does not exist - using root ########################################### [100%] [hans at guest-dhcp-088 ~]$ md5sum /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES/pipenightdreams-0.10.0.tar.gz 143995af21bad76a3b4dad46bcd8670f /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES/pipenightdreams-0.10.0.tar.gz [hans at guest-dhcp-088 ~]$ md5sum Desktop/pipenightdreams-0.10.0.tar.gz f22f23649852f54cca43de775e691de6 Desktop/pipenightdreams-0.10.0.tar.gz [hans at guest-dhcp-088 ~]$ So appereantly upstream put a different tarball but with identical contents in their SRPM (which I used as a start, pretty worthless though). I hope this explains the md5sum issue. I'll create a new SRPM before importing using the upstream tarbal from: http://www.libsdl.org/projects/pipenightdreams/packages/pipenightdreams-0.10.0.tar.gz Instead of the (identical content) one from the upstream SRPM. Unfortunatly I can't put this new tarbal on my homepage since I'm currently not behind a Pc which has upload access to my homepage. So I have to ask you to trust me on this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 12:43:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 08:43:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187818] Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061243.k36ChcMD008824@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ktorrent : KDE bittorrent client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187818 ------- Additional Comments From wolters.liste at gmx.net 2006-04-06 08:43 EST ------- Just to be clear about this: I do NOT have a sponsorship at the moment and therefore I need someone to sponsor me so that the package can be accpeted. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 12:52:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 08:52:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188014] Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061252.k36Cq9uo010058@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188014 ------- Additional Comments From lukeross at sys3175.co.uk 2006-04-06 08:51 EST ------- Please try http://lukeross.name/pam_otpw-1.3-3.src.rpm Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From lists at timj.co.uk Thu Apr 6 14:40:10 2006 From: lists at timj.co.uk (Tim Jackson) Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 15:40:10 +0100 Subject: Updating a package in multiple branches Message-ID: <4435284A.7070601@timj.co.uk> This is the first time I've done a package update, so forgive me if I'm missing the obvious here. I've just successfully updated altermime in the devel branch from 0.3.6-0.3.7, following the instructions on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsingCvsFaq . That's cool, but now I need to update the FC-4 and FC-5 branches. Do I have to repeat the whole process for each branch (including uploading the package source tarball again) or is there some shortcut to say "copy what's in the devel branch to branches X and Y". What about the sources file, should I ever touch this manually or only ever allow it to be changed via "make "? Is there a document about this that I should be reading? Thanks Tim From paul at city-fan.org Thu Apr 6 14:48:44 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 15:48:44 +0100 Subject: Updating a package in multiple branches In-Reply-To: <4435284A.7070601@timj.co.uk> References: <4435284A.7070601@timj.co.uk> Message-ID: <44352A4C.40605@city-fan.org> Tim Jackson wrote: > This is the first time I've done a package update, so forgive me if I'm > missing the obvious here. > > I've just successfully updated altermime in the devel branch from > 0.3.6-0.3.7, following the instructions on > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsingCvsFaq . That's cool, but now > I need to update the FC-4 and FC-5 branches. Do I have to repeat the > whole process for each branch (including uploading the package source > tarball again) or is there some shortcut to say "copy what's in the > devel branch to branches X and Y". What about the sources file, should I > ever touch this manually or only ever allow it to be changed via "make > "? > > Is there a document about this that I should be reading? I do pretty much the same thing for each branch. The source upload takes no time at all though, as it's skipped if the file is already present in the lookaside cache, so all that step does is to update the "sources" and ".cvsignore" files. So I basically do: cd package cvs update -dP cd devel cp -p /path/to/new/tarball . (update source) vi package.spec (update spec) ... (extensive testing of new package version) ... make new-sources FILES=tarball cvs commit package.spec sources .cvsignore make tag make build cd ../FC-5 mv ../devel/tarball . cp ../devel/package.spec . make new-sources FILES=tarball cvs commit package.spec sources .cvsignore make tag make build cd ../FC-4 mv ../FC-5/tarball . cp ../devel/package.spec . make new-sources FILES=tarball cvs commit package.spec sources .cvsignore make tag make build etc. From tibbs at math.uh.edu Thu Apr 6 16:25:20 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 11:25:20 -0500 Subject: Updating a package in multiple branches In-Reply-To: <4435284A.7070601@timj.co.uk> (Tim Jackson's message of "Thu, 06 Apr 2006 15:40:10 +0100") References: <4435284A.7070601@timj.co.uk> Message-ID: >>>>> "TJ" == Tim Jackson writes: TJ> Do I have to repeat the whole process for each branch (including TJ> uploading the package source tarball again) or is there some TJ> shortcut to say "copy what's in the devel branch to branches X and TJ> Y". What I do is simple: Do all normal operations on the devel branch. Leave clog file in the directory but delete other extraneous files. cd FC-5 rm ^branch (this is Zsh syntax to delete every file except for "branch"; I don't know what other shells would want) cp ../devel/* . cvs add all the new files cvs delete all the old files cvs commit -F clog make tag make plague repeat for FC-4 and FC-3 branches This assumes no changes at all between the devel branch and the other branches. TJ> What about the sources file, should I ever touch this manually or TJ> only ever allow it to be changed via "make "? I never touch it; it gets copied over from devel. - J< From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 16:27:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 12:27:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187913] Review Request: mysql-query-browser In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061627.k36GRaYD024064@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mysql-query-browser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187913 imlinux at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |imlinux at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-04-06 12:27 EST ------- Looks good, couple of things. - Source0 does not exist: http://dev.mysql.com/get/Downloads/MySQLAdministrationSuite/mysql-query-browser-1.1.18.tar.gz - %find_lang requres gettext (This prevents a successful mock build) - Duplicate BuildRequires: openssl-devel is provided by mysql-devel - Duplicate BuildRequires: libglade2-devel is provided gtkhtml3-devel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 6 16:34:58 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 12:34:58 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060406163458.721F27FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 9 denyhosts-2.3-2.fc3 dillo-0.8.5-2.fc3 fluxbox-0.9.15.1-1.fc3 git-1.2.5-1.fc3 libetpan-0.45-1.fc3 openvpn-2.0.6-1.fc3 spamass-milter-0.3.1-1.fc3 syslog-ng-1.6.10-1.fc3 wine-0.9.11-2.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 6 16:35:42 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 12:35:42 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060406163542.E64B87FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 9 denyhosts-2.3-2.fc4 dillo-0.8.5-2.fc4 fluxbox-0.9.15.1-1.fc4 git-1.2.5-1.fc4 libetpan-0.45-1.fc4 liferea-1.0.9-2.fc4 openvpn-2.0.6-1.fc4 spamass-milter-0.3.1-1.fc4 wine-0.9.11-2.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 6 16:38:05 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 12:38:05 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060406163805.41A947FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 13 blktool-4-4.fc5 denyhosts-2.3-2.fc5 dillo-0.8.5-2.fc5 fluxbox-0.9.15.1-1.fc5 git-1.2.5-1.fc5 liferea-1.0.9-2.fc5 loudmouth-1.0.3-2.fc5 openvpn-2.1-0.8.beta12.fc5 perl-UNIVERSAL-can-1.12-1.fc5 spamass-milter-0.3.1-1.fc5 sylpheed-claws-2.1.0-1.fc5 xchat-gnome-0.11-1.fc5 yumex-0.99.16-1.0.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 6 16:43:16 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 12:43:16 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060406164316.02A9B7FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 17 altermime-0.3.7-1.fc6 blktool-4-4.fc6 denyhosts-2.3-2.fc6 dillo-0.8.5-2.fc6 fluxbox-0.9.15.1-1.fc6 git-1.2.5-1.fc6 kdemultimedia-extras-3.5.1-8.fc6 liferea-1.0.9-3.fc6 loudmouth-1.0.3-3.fc6 maxima-5.9.3-1.fc6 openvpn-2.1-0.8.beta12.fc6 pam_mount-0.13.0-3 perl-DBD-SQLite-1.11-4.fc6 perl-UNIVERSAL-can-1.12-1.fc6 spamass-milter-0.3.1-1.fc6 syslog-ng-1.6.10-2.fc6 yumex-0.99.16-1.0.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 16:57:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 12:57:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188168] New: Review Request: gauche - Scheme script interpreter with multibyte character handling Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188168 Summary: Review Request: gauche - Scheme script interpreter with multibyte character handling Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: gemi at bluewin.ch QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Url: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/spec/gauche.spec SRPM Url: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/5/i386/SRPMS.gemi/gauche-0.8.6-2.fc5.src.rpm Description: Gauche is a Scheme interpreter conforming Revised^5 Report on Algorithmic Language Scheme. It is designed for rapid development of daily tools like system management and text processing. It can handle multibyte character strings natively. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 17:47:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 13:47:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187843] Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061747.k36HlnE6010768@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187843 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-06 13:47 EST ------- http://www.phpmyadmin.net/home_page/security.php?issue=PMASA-2006-1 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 17:55:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 13:55:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188176] New: Review Request: gauche-gtk - Gauche extension module to use GTK Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188176 Summary: Review Request: gauche-gtk - Gauche extension module to use GTK Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: gemi at bluewin.ch QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Url: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/spec/gauche-gtk.spec SRPM Url: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/5/i386/SRPMS.gemi/gauche-gtk-0.4.1-5.fc5.src.rpm Description: Gauche extension module to use GTK. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 17:56:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 13:56:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188178] New: Review Request: gauche-gl - OpenGL binding for Gauche Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188178 Summary: Review Request: gauche-gl - OpenGL binding for Gauche Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: gemi at bluewin.ch QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Url: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/spec/gauche-gl.spec SRPM Url: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/5/i386/SRPMS.gemi/gauche-gl-0.4.1-2.fc5.src.rpm info here> Description: OpenGL binding for Gauche. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 18:00:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 14:00:55 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187843] Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061800.k36I0tMZ013744@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpMyAdmin - Web based MySQL browser written in php https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187843 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-04-06 14:00 EST ------- Updated package to fix issues brought up in Comment #8, thanks Ville Skytt?! SPEC: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/phpMyAdmin/phpMyAdmin.spec SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/phpMyAdmin/phpMyAdmin-2.8.0.3-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 18:01:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 14:01:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185673] Review Request: pmidi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061801.k36I1Ij3013831@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pmidi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185673 ------- Additional Comments From gemi at bluewin.ch 2006-04-06 14:01 EST ------- Is this really needed. It seems to me that /usr/bin/aplaymidi from alsa-utils is almost the same thing as pmidi. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 18:07:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 14:07:41 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188180] New: Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180 Summary: Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: rdieter at math.unl.edu QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/qt4-4.1.2-2.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.unstable/qt4-4.1.2-2.src.rpm Description: < Qt is a GUI software toolkit which simplifies the task of writing and maintaining GUI (Graphical User Interface) applications for the X Window System. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 18:10:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 14:10:44 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188180] Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061810.k36IAi5J015961@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180 rdieter at math.unl.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |ttp://www.trolltech.com/prod | |ucts/qt/ ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-06 14:10 EST ------- Only lightly tested, but wanted to get this out there for more feedback/review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 18:40:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 14:40:45 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188180] Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061840.k36Iejul022782@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180 dennis at ausil.us changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dennis at ausil.us ------- Additional Comments From dennis at ausil.us 2006-04-06 14:40 EST ------- Im not going to have time for a full review on this but am going to watch with interest. I think the man pages should be installed inside the qt4 tree just for additional documentation perhaps in %{qtdir}/man -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 18:41:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 14:41:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187913] Review Request: mysql-query-browser In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061841.k36IfG9O022920@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mysql-query-browser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187913 ------- Additional Comments From dennis at ausil.us 2006-04-06 14:41 EST ------- It seems mysql has removed the ability to download directly from them. they are forcing you to choose a mirror. so i chose pair networks as they are listed as one of the two primary mirrors. SRPM: http://ausil.us/packages/mysql-query-browser-1.1.18-3.fc5.src.rpm SPEC: http://ausil.us/packages/mysql-query-browser.spec fixed the Build Requires though i built in mock ok on fc4 and fc5 on both X86_64 and i386 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 18:48:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 14:48:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188180] Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061848.k36ImHN8025074@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-06 14:48 EST ------- Good point, I'll make sure to include %{qtdir}/man in the next pkg iteration. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 19:15:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 15:15:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177818] Review Request: adplug In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061915.k36JFrd7032011@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: adplug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177818 ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-04-06 15:15 EST ------- Finally realized that /var/lib/adplug/adplug.db is the best place to have is so as to avoid unecessary patching of upstream. This was suggested earlier as well. Spec Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/adplug.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/adplug-1.5.1-8.20060323cvs.src.rpm I will remove dependencies on filesystem issues since this no longer blocks this bug. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 19:19:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 15:19:34 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188180] Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061919.k36JJY40000925@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-06 15:19 EST ------- %changelog * Thu Apr 06 2006 Rex Dieter 4.1.2-3 - include manpages at %%qtdir/man Spec Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/qt4-4.1.2-3.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.unstable/qt4-4.1.2-3.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 6 19:35:00 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 19:35:00 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-06 Message-ID: <20060406193500.7110.32382@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch wine-cms 0.9.11-2.fc3.i386 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: andreas.bierfert AT lowlatency.de package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg artwiz-aleczapka-fonts package: wine-cms - 0.9.11-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: liblcms.so.1 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: artwiz-aleczapka-fonts pyxdg From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 6 19:35:10 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 19:35:10 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-06 Message-ID: <20060406193510.7114.96684@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc4.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc4.ppc plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc4.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch wine-cms 0.9.11-2.fc4.i386 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- New report for: andreas.bierfert AT lowlatency.de package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: artwiz-aleczapka-fonts package: wine-cms - 0.9.11-2.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: liblcms.so.1 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: artwiz-aleczapka-fonts package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: artwiz-aleczapka-fonts From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 6 19:35:22 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 19:35:22 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-06 Message-ID: <20060406193522.7117.39045@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 6 19:35:33 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 19:35:33 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-06 Message-ID: <20060406193533.7121.96004@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 edb-gtk 1.0.5.005-1.fc5.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc edb-gtk 1.0.5.005-1.fc5.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 edb-gtk 1.0.5.005-1.fc5.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 rekall-devel 2.2.4-8.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 19:54:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 15:54:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185673] Review Request: pmidi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604061954.k36Jsu6U009542@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pmidi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185673 triad at df.lth.se changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX ------- Additional Comments From triad at df.lth.se 2006-04-06 15:54 EST ------- You're right. I simply wasn't aware of aplaymidi. It's a jungle out there... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 20:18:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 16:18:35 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187809] Review Request: perl-GSSAPI - Perl extension providing access to the GSSAPIv2 library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604062018.k36KIZYC014368@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-GSSAPI - Perl extension providing access to the GSSAPIv2 library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187809 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-04-06 16:18 EST ------- Update to 0.21. http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/fedora/perl-GSSAPI-0.21-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 22:21:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 18:21:06 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182941] Review Request: nessus-core Network vulnerability scanner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604062221.k36ML6DZ009256@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nessus-core Network vulnerability scanner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182941 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-04-06 18:20 EST ------- (In reply to comment #11) > Hm did you setup up the plugin directory correctly? Did you install the plugins? > > Here is a version with the stuff you mentioned fixed. > > http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/nessus-core-2.2.6-3.src.rpm > http://fedora.lowlatency.de/review/nessus-core.spec Exactly, upon adding plugin package (bug 185799) the scan works. Lots of rpmlint. We can ignore every changelog version due to line wrapping, and no docs because the docs are in other packages. rpmlint of nessus-gui-2.2.6-2.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-gui no-version-in-last-changelog W: nessus-gui no-documentation rpmlint of nessus-server-2.2.6-2.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-server summary-not-capitalized nessusd is the server part of the nessus client-server model W: nessus-server no-version-in-last-changelog E: nessus-server non-readable /etc/pki/nessus/private/CA/serverkey.pem 0600 E: nessus-server non-readable /etc/pki/nessus/private/CA/cakey.pem 0600 E: nessus-server incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/nessusd E: nessus-server non-readable /etc/nessus/nessusd.conf 0600 W: nessus-server incoherent-init-script-name nessusd Permissions to be expected on keys. init script works, can ignore that. rpmlint of nessus-client-2.2.6-2.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-client no-version-in-last-changelog W: nessus-client no-documentation rpmlint of nessus-core-2.2.6-2.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-core no-version-in-last-changelog rpmlint of nessus-core-devel-2.2.6-2.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-core-devel no-version-in-last-changelog rpmlint of nessus-gui-2.2.6-2.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-gui no-version-in-last-changelog W: nessus-gui no-documentation rpmlint of nessus-server-2.2.6-2.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-server summary-not-capitalized nessusd is the server part of the nessus client-server model W: nessus-server no-version-in-last-changelog E: nessus-server non-readable /etc/pki/nessus/private/CA/serverkey.pem 0600 E: nessus-server non-readable /etc/pki/nessus/private/CA/cakey.pem 0600 E: nessus-server incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/nessusd E: nessus-server non-readable /etc/nessus/nessusd.conf 0600 W: nessus-server incoherent-init-script-name nessusd logrotate conf looks fine to me. rpmlint of nessus-client-2.2.6-2.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-client no-version-in-last-changelog W: nessus-client no-documentation rpmlint of nessus-core-2.2.6-2.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-core no-version-in-last-changelog rpmlint of nessus-core-devel-2.2.6-2.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-core-devel no-version-in-last-changelog rpmlint of nessus-gui-2.2.6-3.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-gui no-version-in-last-changelog W: nessus-gui no-documentation rpmlint of nessus-server-2.2.6-3.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-server summary-not-capitalized nessusd is the server part of the nessus client-server model W: nessus-server no-version-in-last-changelog E: nessus-server non-readable /etc/pki/nessus/private/CA/cakey.pem 0600 E: nessus-server non-readable /etc/nessus/nessusd.conf 0600 E: nessus-server incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/nessusd E: nessus-server non-readable /etc/pki/nessus/private/CA/serverkey.pem 0600 W: nessus-server incoherent-init-script-name nessusd rpmlint of nessus-client-2.2.6-3.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-client no-version-in-last-changelog W: nessus-client no-documentation rpmlint of nessus-core-2.2.6-3.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-core no-version-in-last-changelog rpmlint of nessus-core-devel-2.2.6-3.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-core-devel no-version-in-last-changelog - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPL) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - .desktop file for gui - devel package ok (with just includes no need to depend on main package libraries) APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 22:29:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 18:29:45 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188204] New: Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188204 Summary: Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/crystal-stacker.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/crystal-stacker-1.5-0.pre.1.src.rpm Description: If you've played Columns then you know what Crystal Stacker is all about. Match 3 or more of the same color crystals either horizontally, vertically, or dia- gonally to destroy them. For every 45 crystals you destroy, the level increases and the crystals fall faster. The higher the level, the more points you are awarded for destroying crystals. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 22:33:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 18:33:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188081] Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604062233.k36MXImu011385@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188081 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-06 18:33 EST ------- New SRPM using the plain upstream tarbal instead of the upstream tarbal from the upstream SRPM at: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/pipenightdreams-0.10.0-1.src.rpm Now can we get this review moving forward please :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 22:56:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 18:56:58 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188205] New: Review Request: pessulus-0.9 Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188205 Summary: Review Request: pessulus-0.9 Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: splinux at fedoraproject.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/pessulus/pessulus.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/pessulus/pessulus-0.9-1.fc6.src.rpm Description: Pessulus is a lockdown editor for GNOME, written in python. Pessulus enables administrators to set mandatory settings in GConf. The users can not change these settings. Use of pessulus can be useful on computers that are open to use by everyone, e.g. in an internet cafe. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 23:09:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 19:09:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187932] Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604062309.k36N9vdk016860@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187932 pertusus at free.fr changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pertusus at free.fr ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-06 19:09 EST ------- I think that VTK should be packaged separately, and then paraview should use the installed VTK. Except if the embedded VTK is based on the cvs (which seems so) and paraview needs that version, in that case, this could be done later. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 23:16:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 19:16:48 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188207] New: Review Request: esdl - SDL bindings for Erlang Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188207 Summary: Review Request: esdl - SDL bindings for Erlang Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: gemi at bluewin.ch QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Url: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/spec/esdl.spec SRPM Url: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/5/i386/SRPMS.gemi/esdl-0.95.0630-2.fc5.src.rpm Description: A library that gives you access to SDL and OpenGL functionality in your Erlang program. NB: This is needed for the wings 3D modeler. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 6 23:18:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 19:18:08 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188208] New: Review Request: wings - A polygon mesh modeler Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188208 Summary: Review Request: wings - A polygon mesh modeler Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: gemi at bluewin.ch QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Url: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/spec/wings.spec SRPM Url: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/5/i386/SRPMS.gemi/wings-0.98.32b-2.fc5.src.rpm Description: Wings 3D is a polygon mesh modeler inspired by Nendo and Mirai from Izware. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 00:12:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 20:12:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185799] Review Request: nessus-plugins-GPL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070012.k370CvLg026915@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nessus-plugins-GPL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185799 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |jpmahowald at gmail.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-04-06 20:12 EST ------- rpmlint: rpmlint of nessus-plugins-GPL-2.2.6-1.x86_64.rpm:W: nessus-plugins-GPL no-version-in-last-changelog E: nessus-plugins-GPL non-standard-executable-perm /var/lib/nessus/plugins/hydra.nes 0555 E: nessus-plugins-GPL non-standard-executable-perm /var/lib/nessus/plugins/objectserver.nes 0555 E: nessus-plugins-GPL non-standard-executable-perm /var/lib/nessus/plugins/ssl_ciphers.nes 0555 E: nessus-plugins-GPL non-executable-script /var/lib/nessus/plugins_factory/libtool 0444 E: nessus-plugins-GPL non-standard-executable-perm /var/lib/nessus/plugins/ftp_write_dirs.nes 0555 E: nessus-plugins-GPL non-standard-executable-perm /var/lib/nessus/plugins/nmap_tcp_connect.nes 0555 E: nessus-plugins-GPL non-standard-executable-perm /var/lib/nessus/plugins/snmp_portscan.nes 0555 E: nessus-plugins-GPL non-standard-executable-perm /var/lib/nessus/plugins/nmap_wrapper.nes 0555 E: nessus-plugins-GPL non-standard-executable-perm /var/lib/nessus/plugins/find_service.nes 0555 E: nessus-plugins-GPL non-standard-executable-perm /var/lib/nessus/plugins/smad.nes 0555 E: nessus-plugins-GPL non-standard-executable-perm /var/lib/nessus/plugins/tftp_grab_file.nes 0555 E: nessus-plugins-GPL non-standard-executable-perm /var/lib/nessus/plugins/synscan.nes 0555 E: nessus-plugins-GPL non-standard-executable-perm /var/lib/nessus/plugins/nessus_tcp_scanner.nes 0555 E: nessus-plugins-GPL non-standard-executable-perm /var/lib/nessus/plugins/nikto_wrapper.nes 0555 E: nessus-plugins-GPL non-standard-executable-perm /var/lib/nessus/plugins/linux_tftp.nes 0555 rpm was probably expecting 755 or so. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPL (obviously :) and BSD) OK, text in %doc, matches source However, though I'm not a lawyer, certain terms in the Tenable license seem too restrictive, particularly in the Other Restrictions clause. Which plugins are licensed under this? - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86_64), works - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 02:04:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 22:04:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187932] Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070204.k3724cNk015307@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187932 ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-04-06 22:04 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > I think that VTK should be packaged separately, and then paraview should use the > installed VTK. Except if the embedded VTK is based on the cvs (which seems so) > and paraview needs that version, in that case, this could be done later. I principle, I agree and have done similar with other packages. However, this one is quite complex VTK is configured specifically for use with ParaView. The Kitware developers don't recommend it (though they don't support using the system Tcl/Tk which I have done). So, I'm planning on leaving it the way it is for now. In the meantime, I've got a new version that creates an MPI version as well (just need the new spec): http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/paraview.spec http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/paraview-2.4.3-2.src.rpm This is a beast to compile. Takes about 2 hours on a fast Athlon 64 system. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 02:30:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 22:30:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182040] Review Request: ratpoison - simplified keyboard-only window manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070230.k372UC3m020991@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ratpoison - simplified keyboard-only window manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182040 kevin at tummy.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |kevin at tummy.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-04-06 22:30 EST ------- Here's A review: MUST items: See below - rpmlint output OK - Package name. OK - Spec file name matches. OK - Package guidelines. OK - License. (GPL) OK - License field matches in spec. OK - License included in files. OK - Spec in american english. OK - md5sum of source from upstream 75541248c355a3f1e09e864dd23a43f4 ratpoison-1.3.0.tar.gz 75541248c355a3f1e09e864dd23a43f4 ratpoison-1.3.0.tar.gz.1 OK - Compiles and builds on one arch at least. OK - No forbidden buildrequires included OK - Owns all directories it creates. OK - No duplicate files in %files listing. OK - Permissions on files correct. OK - Clean section correct. OK - Macros consistant. OK - Code not content. OK - Doesn't own any files/dirs that are already owned by other packages. Items needing attention: 1. Not a blocker, but 1.4.0 is out. 2. blocker: BuildRequires: xorg-x11-devel isn't valid in fc5 and later. Builds ok on fc4. Suggest: 'BuildRequires: libX11-devel' for devel/fc5. 3. blocker: unpackaged files on build: warning: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/share/info/dir Suggest: adding to the end of install: rm -f ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}/%{_infodir}/dir 4. Requires: aren't needed at all. Can be removed. rpm will detect them. 5. rpmlint has some output: W: ratpoison strange-permission ratpoison.desktop 0755 E: ratpoison script-without-shellbang /usr/share/xsessions/ratpoison.desktop Can be ignored. E: ratpoison non-executable-script /usr/share/ratpoison/allwindows.sh 0644 E: ratpoison non-executable-script /usr/share/ratpoison/genrpbindings 0644 E: ratpoison non-executable-script /usr/share/ratpoison/rpshowall.sh 0644 E: ratpoison non-executable-script /usr/share/ratpoison/split.sh 0644 E: ratpoison non-executable-script /usr/share/ratpoison/clickframe.pl 0644 E: ratpoison non-executable-script /usr/share/ratpoison/rpws 0644 These should all probibly be 755? E: ratpoison info-files-without-install-info-postin /usr/share/info/ratpoison.info.gzE: ratpoison info-files-without-install-info-postun /usr/share/info/ratpoison.info.gz Should use install-info in postin, and postun? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 03:23:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 23:23:22 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186919] Review Request: eric: Python IDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070323.k373NMOr032231@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: eric: Python IDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186919 ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-04-06 23:23 EST ------- Not a full review (yet), but some major issues: - Seems to depend on PyQt-qscintilla, which as far as I can see isn't in extras or core. Failed build dependencies: PyQt-qscintilla is needed by eric-3.8.2-1.i386 - Uses the %{?kde} macro. That sounds like something from the kde-redhat project that isn't defined in fedora-extras. - Might check the spec against the macros and such from the extras python package guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 04:02:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 00:02:13 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188180] Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070402.k3742DL5007402@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-07 00:02 EST ------- Nevermind the update to qt4-4.1.2-3. Turns out the build fails, and the manpages that the .spec referred to before do not exist. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 04:10:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 00:10:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186919] Review Request: eric: Python IDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070410.k374Anht008586@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: eric: Python IDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186919 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-07 00:10 EST ------- Oops, looks like we'll be needing to submit PyQt-qscintilla too. Sorry about that. %{?kde} is harmless. It evaluates to %{nil} if not defined (that's what the ? is for) The python bits work, and mesh pretty close with the existing guidelines. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 04:34:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 00:34:48 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188105] Review Request: torque In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070434.k374Ymjw012181@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 ed at eh3.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |CANTFIX ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-04-07 00:34 EST ------- Hi Garrick, I started to do a torque review and came across the following in the PBS_License.txt file: 2. Redistribution in any form is only permitted for non-commercial, non-profit purposes. There can be no charge for the Software or any software incorporating the Software. Further, there can be no expectation of revenue generated as a consequence of redistributing the Software. So I'm afraid the above isn't acceptable within FE since the Fedora Project aims to provide FOSS packages that are "free for anyone to use, modify and distribute" -- and the "anyone" may include both non- and for-profit entities. So the above license disqualifies this submission: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Legal Sorry... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 04:35:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 00:35:11 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177841] Tracker: New Extras packages that need a sponsor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070435.k374ZBqT012268@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Tracker: New Extras packages that need a sponsor Alias: FE-NEEDSPONSOR https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 Bug 177841 depends on bug 188105, which changed state. Bug 188105 Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |CANTFIX Status|NEW |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 05:02:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 01:02:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188105] Review Request: torque In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070502.k3752uIX016276@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 ------- Additional Comments From garrick at usc.edu 2006-04-07 01:02 EST ------- Fortunately we don't have to worry about that. A few lines up is, "After December 31, 2001, only conditions 3-6 must be met." Btw, I just posted torque-2.1.0p0-0.2.200604060235.src.rpm which has better .desktop files, some menu icons, and matching upstream source (the first srpm was just pulled out of CVS). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 06:13:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 02:13:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177211] Review Request: newsx - NNTP news exchange utility In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070613.k376DPi3025368@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: newsx - NNTP news exchange utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177211 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |jpmahowald at gmail.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-04-07 02:13 EST ------- Build failed. checking history... ERROR: cannot determine hash mode of /var/lib/news/history Try running makehistory first. There's a good chance your Requires line is not needed. rpm can figure out from the BuildRequires that it needs inn. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Fri Apr 7 06:43:40 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 08:43:40 +0200 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-05 In-Reply-To: <20060405234854.b4773cc3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060405173942.19376.18329@faldor.intranet> <20060405230453.52fb2d99@alkaid.a.lan> <20060405234854.b4773cc3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060407084340.2ed2869b@alkaid.a.lan> On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 23:48:54 +0200 Michael Schwendt wrote: > lcms is unchanged since 20-Jan-2006 in FE4, so this dep breakage most > likely is due to wine i386 being copied to x86_64 Ah yes that could be the case. So for FE4 and FE3 lcms should be copied the x86_64 repo as well. - Andreas -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 173 5803043 | mail preferred -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 06:51:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 02:51:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175495] Review Request: cgi-util: A C library for creating CGI programs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070651.k376pV3u031384@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cgi-util: A C library for creating CGI programs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175495 ivazquez at ivazquez.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-04-07 02:51 EST ------- APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 07:01:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 03:01:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186632] Review Request: svn2cl - Create a ChangeLog from a Subversion log In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070701.k3771Udf032726@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: svn2cl - Create a ChangeLog from a Subversion log https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186632 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |jpmahowald at gmail.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-04-07 03:01 EST ------- - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (BSD) OK - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package builds on devel (x86_64) - no BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file - works APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 07:19:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 03:19:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185799] Review Request: nessus-plugins-GPL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070719.k377J9L7003065@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nessus-plugins-GPL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185799 ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-04-07 03:18 EST ------- to be honest: I don't know. I will see if I can find something out so... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 07:22:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 03:22:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188014] Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070722.k377MCtv003919@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188014 ------- Additional Comments From tmraz at redhat.com 2006-04-07 03:22 EST ------- There's a mistake in the spec file. The pam_otpw.8 manpage is installed as otpw-gen.8 (also in the %files section). Also please patch the Makefile to contain $(LDFLAGS) in the linking of otpw-gen. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 09:18:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 05:18:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188081] Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070918.k379Ih5T031065@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188081 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-07 05:18 EST ------- Perhaps this complaint should be pushed back upstream: I can't seem to quit out of the game except while the game is running. to reproduce: Start a game and do nothing. When you lose the screen will prompt you to press to continue. Press instead. Nothing happens. Press the "x" window manager decoration to kill the window. Nothing happens. I would expect that either of these would quit the game, but they don't. Now press and let the game restart. Before it stops again, press . Now the game returns to the splash screen where you can press again to quit. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 09:23:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 05:23:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188081] Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070923.k379Nvaw031920@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188081 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-07 05:23 EST ------- Michael (wart at ...), Yeah I noticed that too, I don't know how alive upstream is though. I'll take a look at this and fix it myself, this should be pretty trivial. But not right now as I have todo things for like erm *work* . -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 09:36:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 05:36:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188204] Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604070936.k379arBp002178@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188204 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-07 05:36 EST ------- New version which doesn't pause the music when selecting a new theme (not needed under Unix because we use threads): Spec Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/crystal-stacker.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/crystal-stacker-1.5-0.pre.2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 10:40:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 06:40:13 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188081] Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604071040.k37AeDcU015207@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188081 joost at cnoc.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From joost at cnoc.nl 2006-04-07 06:40 EST ------- About the scriptlets, these were new to me. Thanks for the answers. And i've looked at the new srpm, and ik looks ok to me. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 11:32:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 07:32:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188081] Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604071132.k37BW9oc024162@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pipenightdreams - Connect the waterpipes to create a proper pipeline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188081 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-07 07:31 EST ------- Thanks! Imported, build, FC-4 and FC-5 branches requested, added to owners.list, removed from packages being packaged list on SIGs/Games wiki page, added to games I've packaged on my wiki page. Once the FC-5 branch is there and build I'll also add it to comps. Phew, anyone feel like automating this? Michael, can you create a seperate bug for the ESC and alt-F4 not working problem, then I'll leave that open untill I've got some more time. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 11:43:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 07:43:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188105] Review Request: torque In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604071143.k37BhbfT026654@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 ed at eh3.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |REOPENED Resolution|CANTFIX | ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-04-07 07:43 EST ------- I'm sorry! I've re-opened the bug and will continue with the review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 11:43:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 07:43:51 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177841] Tracker: New Extras packages that need a sponsor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604071143.k37Bhpnh026734@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Tracker: New Extras packages that need a sponsor Alias: FE-NEEDSPONSOR https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 Bug 177841 depends on bug 188105, which changed state. Bug 188105 Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|CANTFIX | Status|CLOSED |REOPENED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Fri Apr 7 12:14:03 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 13:14:03 +0100 Subject: Adoption of two packages Message-ID: <1144412043.20930.9.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, Unless someone objects, I'll adopt gonvert and gdeskcal for FE. I've rebuilt gdeskcal (still the same version as was in FE 4) and updated and built gonvert. Any objections, speak now or forever hold thy peace. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 13:21:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 09:21:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186566] Review Request: bsdiff - binary diff/patch utility In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604071321.k37DLO0m010345@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bsdiff - binary diff/patch utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186566 matthias at rpmforge.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From matthias at rpmforge.net 2006-04-07 09:21 EST ------- All good to go! Minor point : - The source doesn't include a separate file containing the license. According to the packaging guidelines, you should query upstream to include one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 14:52:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 10:52:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188261] New: Review Request: perl-Finanace-Quote Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188261 Summary: Review Request: perl-Finanace-Quote Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: notting at redhat.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/notting/p-f-q/perl-Finance-Quote.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/notting/p-f-q/perl-Finance-Quote-1.11-1.src.rpm Description: A perl module that grabs quotes from various sources. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 14:53:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 10:53:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188261] Review Request: perl-Finanace-Quote In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604071453.k37Eruss032262@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Finanace-Quote https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188261 notting at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |sig at netdot.net ------- Additional Comments From notting at redhat.com 2006-04-07 10:53 EST ------- *** Bug 161410 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 15:10:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 11:10:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188261] Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604071510.k37FAnfM003764@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188261 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: perl- |Review Request: perl- |Finanace-Quote |Finance-Quote ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-04-07 11:10 EST ------- Please submit a package for perl(HTML::TableExtract) too, since it is a dependency of this package. The "BuildRequires: perl >= 1:5.6.1" is redundant for Fedora Extras The "|| :" after "%check" shouldn't be needed in Extras packages. The various module files included in this package generate lots of rpmlint errors about non-executable-scripts, which could be eliminated by removing the shellbangs from the .pm files in %prep. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 15:34:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 11:34:42 -0400 Subject: [Bug 173522] Review Request: milter-regex milter filter regular expression based In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604071534.k37FYgro009699@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: milter-regex milter filter regular expression based https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173522 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |REOPENED Resolution|NOTABUG | ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-04-07 11:34 EST ------- If the submitter is no longer interested in this package, I propose to resubmit it myself, probably late next week when I should have more time. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 15:53:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 11:53:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188261] Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604071553.k37FrNB3014248@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188261 ------- Additional Comments From notting at redhat.com 2006-04-07 11:53 EST ------- Heh. Wonder where I got my TableExtract from. In the meantime, new stuff uploaded. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From ville.skytta at iki.fi Fri Apr 7 17:18:15 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 20:18:15 +0300 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-05 In-Reply-To: <20060407084340.2ed2869b@alkaid.a.lan> References: <20060405173942.19376.18329@faldor.intranet> <20060405230453.52fb2d99@alkaid.a.lan> <20060405234854.b4773cc3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060407084340.2ed2869b@alkaid.a.lan> Message-ID: <1144430295.2800.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 08:43 +0200, Andreas Bierfert wrote: > On Wed, 5 Apr 2006 23:48:54 +0200 > Michael Schwendt wrote: > > lcms is unchanged since 20-Jan-2006 in FE4, so this dep breakage most > > likely is due to wine i386 being copied to x86_64 > > Ah yes that could be the case. So for FE4 and FE3 lcms should be copied the > x86_64 repo as well. lcms installs files outside of %{_libdir}, for example to /usr/bin. Can both i386 and x86_64 of it be installed on FC[34] x86_64 boxes, or does trying to do that result in conflicts? What about the lcms-devel and python-lcms subpackages? From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 17:14:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 13:14:10 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186632] Review Request: svn2cl - Create a ChangeLog from a Subversion log In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604071714.k37HEAXO029678@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: svn2cl - Create a ChangeLog from a Subversion log https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186632 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-07 13:14 EST ------- Thanks, imported and built for devel, FE-5 will follow soon. http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=7351 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 17:38:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 13:38:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188293] New: Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188293 Summary: Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: notting at redhat.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/notting/p-f-q/perl-HTML-TableExtract.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.redhat.com/notting/p-f-q/perl-HTML-TableExtract-2.07-1.noarch.rpm Description: A perl module that extracts tables. Needed for perl-Finance-Quote. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Apr 7 18:02:49 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 14:02:49 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060407180249.6DD907FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 4 artwiz-aleczapka-fonts-1.3-3.fc3 logjam-4.5.3-3.fc3 netgo-0.5-5.fc3 perl-Template-Toolkit-2.14-7.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Apr 7 18:03:54 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 14:03:54 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060407180354.225A47FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 8 artwiz-aleczapka-fonts-1.3-3.fc4 clamav-0.88.1-1.fc4 i8kutils-1.25-7.fc4 logjam-4.5.3-3.fc4 netgo-0.5-5.fc4 perl-Template-Toolkit-2.14-7.fc4 pikdev-0.8.4-10.fc4 xsupplicant-1.2.4-1.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Apr 7 18:04:18 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 14:04:18 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060407180418.3ED137FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 13 azureus-2.4.0.3-0.20060328cvs_4.fc5 clamav-0.88.1-1.fc5 exim-4.61-2.fc5 i8kutils-1.25-7.fc5 logjam-4.5.3-3.fc5 netgo-0.5-5.fc5 perl-Template-Toolkit-2.14-7.fc5 pikdev-0.8.4-10.fc5 python-imaging-1.1.5-5.fc5 raidem-0.3-2.fc5 svn2cl-0.6-1.fc5 xsupplicant-1.2.4-1.fc5 zasx-1.30-1.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Apr 7 18:04:58 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 14:04:58 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060407180458.8403E7FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 19 R-2.2.1-5.fc6 apt-0.5.15lorg3-0.2.pre4.fc6 cmake-2.2.3-4.fc6 exim-4.61-2.fc6 i8kutils-1.25-7.fc6 logjam-4.5.3-3.fc6 nessus-core-2.2.6-3.fc6 netgo-0.5-5.fc6 perl-Template-Toolkit-2.14-7.fc6 pikdev-0.8.4-10.fc6 pipenightdreams-0.10.0-1.fc6 pipenightdreams-0.10.0-2.fc6 python-imaging-1.1.5-5.fc6 raidem-0.3-2.fc6 svn2cl-0.6-1.fc6 xmms-1.2.10-23.fc6 xmms-alarm-0.3.7-3.fc6 xmms-modplug-2.05-6.fc6 xsupplicant-1.2.4-1.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 18:34:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 14:34:05 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177235] Review Request: sysconftool - Macros for aclocal to install configuration files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604071834.k37IY5E5014219@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sysconftool - Macros for aclocal to install configuration files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177235 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-04-07 14:33 EST ------- Dominik, please go ahead and jump through the hoops to get this in. I'm trying to clear out my outstanding bugs. :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 19:04:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 15:04:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186566] Review Request: bsdiff - binary diff/patch utility In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604071904.k37J4hjg020568@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bsdiff - binary diff/patch utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186566 ------- Additional Comments From jnovy at redhat.com 2006-04-07 15:04 EST ------- Matthias, thanks for the great work reviewing bsdiff! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 19:24:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 15:24:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182040] Review Request: ratpoison - simplified keyboard-only window manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604071924.k37JO9tD024750@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ratpoison - simplified keyboard-only window manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182040 ------- Additional Comments From jwb at redhat.com 2006-04-07 15:23 EST ------- Above errors corrected - although I didn't get the rpmlint errors about the install-info from the old SRPM on my system. Not sure what my system is doing to me. New packages: SPEC: http://www.berningeronline.net/ratpoison.spec SRPM: http://www.berningeronline.net/ratpoison-1.4.0-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 19:25:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 15:25:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188309] New: Review Request: conserver - serial console server daemon/client Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188309 Summary: Review Request: conserver - serial console server daemon/client Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: jima at auroralinux.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://beer.tclug.org/fedora-extras/conserver/conserver.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://beer.tclug.org/fedora-extras/conserver/conserver-8.1.13-1.src.rpm Description: Conserver is an application that allows multiple users to watch a serial console at the same time. It can log the data, allows users to take write-access of a console (one at a time), and has a variety of bells and whistles to accentuate that basic functionality. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 19:38:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 15:38:06 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177276] Review Request: perl-DBD-AnyData : DBI access to XML, CSV and other formats In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604071938.k37Jc680027946@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-DBD-AnyData : DBI access to XML, CSV and other formats https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177276 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-07 15:37 EST ------- Sorry for taking so long to get back to this. The package builds in mock on FC-5 and devel, and rpmlint is happy. %check throws several errors of the form: DBI handle 0xa4c9e38 cleared whilst still active at test.pl line 39. dbih_clearcom (sth 0xa4c9e38, com 0xa59b458, imp DBD::AnyData::st): FLAGS 0x182115: COMSET Active Warn PrintError PrintWarn ShowErrorStatement PARENT DBI::db=HASH(0xa0c98d4) KIDS 0 (0 Active) IMP_DATA undef NUM_OF_FIELDS 3 NUM_OF_PARAMS 0 which doesn't effect the build but might we worth looking into if they would appear in actual use. * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary. * source files match upstream: 3434afdade1e2c9d79e85eca4bd8df17 DBD-AnyData-0.08.tar.gz 3434afdade1e2c9d79e85eca4bd8df17 DBD-AnyData-0.08.tar.gz-save a23f31a0eb908ce5b5468bd2d4e44744 perl-DBD-AnyData.spec * package builds in mock. * BuildRequires are proper. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * package does not create any directories (besides %doc) and only uses directories created by its dependencies. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. * Package owns no files that are owned by other packages. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 19:50:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 15:50:10 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188205] Review Request: pessulus-0.9 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604071950.k37JoAWf030920@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pessulus-0.9 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188205 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-04-07 15:49 EST ------- A few changes need to be made to this package: - You were missing a lot of BuildRequires. Look carefully at what %configure is checking for. - Remove unnecessary Requires: There is no need to hardcode gtk when pygtk is a Requires. - You should always use version-release in changelog entries - Make sure you have correct directory ownership, instead of wild-carding %{_libdir} - use python_sitearch for python packages - make python "scripts" executable, this will shutup rpmlint - use find_lang to grab locales I'm attaching a fixed spec to this email. The following review is based on the fixed spec: Good: - rpmlint checks return: E: pessulus no-binary (safe to ignore) E: pessulus script-without-shellbang /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/Pessulus/__init__.py (safe to ignore, this is a 0 file) - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPL) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - locales handled properly - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - desktop file OK Unless you have issues with any of the changes in my spec, the package (as modified by my spec) is approved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 20:16:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 16:16:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188261] Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604072016.k37KGQAR007111@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188261 ------- Additional Comments From notting at redhat.com 2006-04-07 16:16 EST ------- perl-HTML-TableExtract added for review in bug 188293. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 20:25:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 16:25:35 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177277] Review Request: perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit : Portable LIMIT Emulation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604072025.k37KPZ1v009705@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit : Portable LIMIT Emulation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177277 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-07 16:25 EST ------- The package builds cleanly and rpmlint is silent. * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: 127285b0a59f2a671fd4c411371d4877 SQL-Abstract-Limit-0.12.tar.gz 127285b0a59f2a671fd4c411371d4877 SQL-Abstract-Limit-0.12.tar.gz-upstream * package builds in mock. * BuildRequires are proper. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directory it creates. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. * The package owns %{perl_vendorlib}/SQL, which will probably also be owned by any module under the SQL:: namespace. However, none of the dependencies create this directory so there is no alternative but for this package to own it. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 20:34:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 16:34:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188309] Review Request: conserver - serial console server daemon/client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604072034.k37KYPC1012682@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: conserver - serial console server daemon/client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188309 tcallawa at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |tcallawa at redhat.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-04-07 16:34 EST ------- - rpmlint checks return: nothing! - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (Distributable, BSD/MIT-ish, same as libtabe) OK, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file One minor note: It would be nice to see LICENSE included as %doc before commit. Otherwise, this is great. Approved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 20:37:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 16:37:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179940] Review Request: ruby-http-access2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604072037.k37KbkQM014092@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ruby-http-access2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179940 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-07 16:37 EST ------- What remains to be worked out before this package can go in? We've already decided that Ruby packages can't currently be noarch and we have worked out that it's currently simpler to just specify the minimum Ruby version instead of using specfile magic to extract the current version from the build environment (and we also have fixed magic if needed). Can you submit a fixed package so I can finish up the review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From johnw at berningeronline.net Fri Apr 7 20:48:53 2006 From: johnw at berningeronline.net (John Berninger) Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 16:48:53 -0400 Subject: Bugzilla packaging question / problem Message-ID: <4436D035.6040002@berningeronline.net> Fedora folks - I'm trying to package Bugzilla for evaluation and eventual inclusion in Extras, and I'm running into a problem that I've no idea how to deal with. I've got a first-run pckage built and I'm attmepting to test it, but it's complaining about perl() requirements not being met - the three requirements it's complaining about are: perl(BugzillaEmail) perl(CGI.pl) perl(globals.pl) The checksetup.pl script shipped with the bugzilla tarball says all necessary modules are present and acocunted for. The CGI.pl and globals.pl files are part of the bugzilla tarball, and I'm assuming it should self-provide the perl(BugzillaEmail) module. Anyone care to poke at the packages at http://www.berningeronline.net/bugzilla.spec http://www.berningeronline.net/bugzilla-2.20-0.1cvs20060407.src.rpm and tell me what I'm doing wrong, or what I need to tweak in the spec file? Thanks in advance for any help! -- John From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 7 20:52:09 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 20:52:09 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-07 Message-ID: <20060407205209.8643.95204@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 7 20:51:50 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 20:51:50 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-07 Message-ID: <20060407205150.8636.69574@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch wine-cms 0.9.11-2.fc3.i386 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 7 20:52:00 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 20:52:00 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-07 Message-ID: <20060407205200.8639.8060@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch wine-cms 0.9.11-2.fc4.i386 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 7 20:52:17 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 20:52:17 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-07 Message-ID: <20060407205217.8646.41493@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 21:10:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 17:10:22 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188293] Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604072110.k37LAM8O023040@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188293 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-07 17:10 EST ------- I can get started with the specfile, but the review process requires an SRPM instead of one that's been built. Could you send one along? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From tibbs at math.uh.edu Fri Apr 7 21:25:44 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 16:25:44 -0500 Subject: Bugzilla packaging question / problem In-Reply-To: <4436D035.6040002@berningeronline.net> (John Berninger's message of "Fri, 07 Apr 2006 16:48:53 -0400") References: <4436D035.6040002@berningeronline.net> Message-ID: >>>>> "JB" == John Berninger writes: JB> I've got a first-run pckage built and I'm attmepting to test it, JB> but it's complaining about perl() requirements not being met - the JB> three requirements it's complaining about are: perl(BugzillaEmail) JB> perl(CGI.pl) perl(globals.pl) I assume that this happens when you attempt to install the package. If so, then this is just RPM's dependency generator getting confused; this happens often with Perl modules. To get around it, you can filter out the unwanted automatically generated Requires: bits. Some info is at: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Perl Although that may be a little outdated with respect to what some people are using, it should get you started. - J< From tibbs at math.uh.edu Fri Apr 7 21:28:09 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 16:28:09 -0500 Subject: Bugzilla packaging question / problem In-Reply-To: (Jason L. Tibbitts, III's message of "Fri, 07 Apr 2006 16:25:44 -0500") References: <4436D035.6040002@berningeronline.net> Message-ID: Also see the thread beginning at https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-perl-devel-list/2006-March/msg00001.html - J< From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 21:34:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 17:34:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188204] Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604072134.k37LY0Zf027188@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188204 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-07 17:33 EST ------- The theme editor fails to run. It opens up a dialog that says "Editor not installed correctly" -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 21:46:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 17:46:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188205] Review Request: pessulus-0.9 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604072146.k37LkE3A029287@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pessulus-0.9 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188205 ------- Additional Comments From splinux at fedoraproject.org 2006-04-07 17:46 EST ------- Thanks for your patch, it's my second rpm package, i'm sorry for the made errors. For me, your patch is welcome ;-) but i'm surprised that the changes are not documented in the extras guideline. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 21:52:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 17:52:19 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188293] Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604072152.k37LqJLj030171@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188293 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-07 17:52 EST ------- Package builds fine in mock and rpmlint is silent. Issues: Can't check a couple of things due to lack of SRPM. %description seems to be from another package. Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. X specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. However, the description seems to be the one from the perl-Finance-Quote package. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. X can't check whether source file matches upstream without SRPM. * package builds in mock. * BuildRequires are proper. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directory it creates. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. * The package owns %{perl_vendorlib}/HTML, which will probably also be owned by any module under the HTML:: namespace. However, there are no dependencies which could create this directory so there is no alternative but for this package to own it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 22:32:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 18:32:35 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187797] Review Request: perl-IO-Interface - Perl extension for accessing network card configuration information In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604072232.k37MWZl0003960@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-IO-Interface - Perl extension for accessing network card configuration information https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187797 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-07 18:32 EST ------- Package builds fine in mock and rpmlint is silent. Issues: BuildRequires: perl is not allowed. * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: 91d5029a32302aa02414c9c8e3353cec IO-Interface-0.98.tar.gz 91d5029a32302aa02414c9c8e3353cec IO-Interface-0.98.tar.gz-srpm * package builds in mock. X BuildRequires: perl not permitted. * a shared library is present, but it is not in the library search path and there is no need to run ldconfig. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directory it creates. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. * The package owns %{perl_archlib}/IO, which will probably also be owned by any arch-specific module under the IO:: namespace. However, none of the dependencies create this directory so there is no alternative but for this package to own it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 7 23:33:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 19:33:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187809] Review Request: perl-GSSAPI - Perl extension providing access to the GSSAPIv2 library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604072333.k37NXIAZ012289@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-GSSAPI - Perl extension providing access to the GSSAPIv2 library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187809 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-07 19:33 EST ------- Package builds fine in mock (devel branch) and rpmlint is silent. Issues: BuildRequires: perl is not allowed. Why %{perl_vendorarch}/GSSAPI* instead of just %{perl_vendorarch}/GSSAPI ? Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: 91d5029a32302aa02414c9c8e3353cec IO-Interface-0.98.tar.gz 91d5029a32302aa02414c9c8e3353cec IO-Interface-0.98.tar.gz-srpm * package builds in mock. X BuildRequires: perl not permitted. * a shared library is present, but it is not in the library search path and there is no need to run ldconfig. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directory it creates. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. * does not own directories owned by other packages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 00:53:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 20:53:55 -0400 Subject: [Bug 180571] Review Request: puppet In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604080053.k380rt7g023176@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: puppet https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180571 ------- Additional Comments From dlutter at redhat.com 2006-04-07 20:53 EST ------- Updated to latest upstream version 0.15.3 Spec: http://people.redhat.com/dlutter/yum/spec/puppet.spec SRPM: http://people.redhat.com/dlutter/yum/SRPMS/puppet-0.15.3-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 01:14:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 21:14:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187313] Review Request: perl-Authen-Radius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604080114.k381EvG1026035@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Authen-Radius https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187313 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-07 21:14 EST ------- I'm not a Radius user but I can do a review. The package builds fine in mock (devel branch) and rpmlint is silent. Issues: BuildRequires: perl is not allowed; cpanspec should be able to generate a proper specfile that doesn't do this. There's no point in the BuildRequires: for perl(IO) and perl(Digest::MD5) as these are part of base perl, but I don't supposed there's any harm in keeping them. The only thing that's strictly necessary is BuildRequires: perl(Data::HexDump) Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: 8427f931a4e0e689ecf8ddf30e5a0ea7 RadiusPerl-0.12.tar.gz 8427f931a4e0e689ecf8ddf30e5a0ea7 RadiusPerl-0.12.tar.gz-srpm * package builds in mock. X BuildRequires: perl not permitted. * no shared libraries. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directory it creates. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. * The package owns %{perl_vendorlib}/Authen, which will probably also be owned by any module under the Authen:: namespace. However, there are no dependencies which could create this directory so there is no alternative but for this package to own it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From ed at eh3.com Sat Apr 8 02:14:36 2006 From: ed at eh3.com (Ed Hill) Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 22:14:36 -0400 Subject: can't build anything locally in mock on FC4 Message-ID: <1144462476.26196.15.camel@ernie> Hi folks, I'm trying to review the torque package and mock builds have been routinely failing for me. I'm running FC4 on i383. If I look in the logs, I see: $ more /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core/result/mockconfig.log ...lots 'o stuff snipped... Executing /usr/sbin/mock-helper yum --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core/root groupinstall build http://newmirror.linux.duke.edu/pub/fedora/linux/core/4/i386/os/repodata/primary.xml.gz: [Errno 4] Socket Error: timed out Trying other mirror. Error: failure: repodata/primary.xml.gz from core: [Errno 256] No more mirrors to try. Cleaning up... Executing /usr/sbin/mock-helper umount /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core/root/proc Executing /usr/sbin/mock-helper umount /var/lib/mock/fedora-4-i386-core/root/dev/pts Done. Is there something I can do locally to fix this? The local mock builds have always been slow for me but this is really frustrating... thanks, Ed -- Edward H. Hill III, PhD office: MIT Dept. of EAPS; Rm 54-1424; 77 Massachusetts Ave. Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 emails: eh3 at mit.edu ed at eh3.com URLs: http://web.mit.edu/eh3/ http://eh3.com/ phone: 617-253-0098 fax: 617-253-4464 From tibbs at math.uh.edu Sat Apr 8 02:22:47 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 21:22:47 -0500 Subject: can't build anything locally in mock on FC4 In-Reply-To: <1144462476.26196.15.camel@ernie> (Ed Hill's message of "Fri, 07 Apr 2006 22:14:36 -0400") References: <1144462476.26196.15.camel@ernie> Message-ID: >>>>> "EH" == Ed Hill writes: EH> Is there something I can do locally to fix this? The local mock EH> builds have always been slow for me but this is really EH> frustrating... It's much faster and reliable if you have a local mirror. That's pretty much all you can do to ensure that you can talk to a host that has the packages. You need a bit over 2.5GB to mirror FC4 i386 and about 3.3GB to mirror FC5 i386. - J< From ed at eh3.com Sat Apr 8 02:27:17 2006 From: ed at eh3.com (Ed Hill) Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 22:27:17 -0400 Subject: can't build anything locally in mock on FC4 In-Reply-To: <1144462476.26196.15.camel@ernie> References: <1144462476.26196.15.camel@ernie> Message-ID: <1144463237.26196.17.camel@ernie> On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 22:14 -0400, Ed Hill wrote: > > Is there something I can do locally to fix this? The local mock builds > have always been slow for me but this is really frustrating... Please ignore the above -- I got the answer on IRC. Ed -- Edward H. Hill III, PhD office: MIT Dept. of EAPS; Rm 54-1424; 77 Massachusetts Ave. Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 emails: eh3 at mit.edu ed at eh3.com URLs: http://web.mit.edu/eh3/ http://eh3.com/ phone: 617-253-0098 fax: 617-253-4464 From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 03:07:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 23:07:44 -0400 Subject: [Bug 183374] Review Request: perl-Crypt-Random In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604080307.k3837iKJ010895@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Crypt-Random https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183374 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-07 23:07 EST ------- perl-Math-Pari is stalled in review, but it doesn't look like there are any issues (such as license) that would prevent the package from eventually being accepted so I'll go ahead and review this. A mock build is clean if the current perl-Math-Pari submission (2.010704-1) is built and added to the repository. rpmlint is silent. * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: 5730c9d5acdd698790216d354ffb0513 Crypt-Random-1.25.tar.gz 5730c9d5acdd698790216d354ffb0513 Crypt-Random-1.25.tar.gz-srpm * package builds in mock (with dependencies added) * BuildRequires are proper. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directory it creates, except for %{_bindir} which is mandated by FHS. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. * The package owns %{perl_vendorlib}/Crypt, which will probably also be owned by any module under the Crypt:: namespace. However, none of the dependencies create this directory so there is no alternative but for this package to own it. APPROVED, subject of course to the approval of perl-Math-Pari. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 03:10:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 23:10:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188293] Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604080310.k383AQnG011364@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188293 ------- Additional Comments From notting at redhat.com 2006-04-07 23:10 EST ------- Heh, I uploaded the wrong RPM. SRPM there now, with fixed description and license tag. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 03:19:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 23:19:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188293] Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604080319.k383JuAW013312@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188293 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-07 23:19 EST ------- Cool. * Source matches upstream: ad3ddfb3e25826071d1e52e336862438 HTML-TableExtract-2.07.tar.gz ad3ddfb3e25826071d1e52e336862438 HTML-TableExtract-2.07.tar.gz-srpm Description looks good. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 03:46:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 23:46:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188105] Review Request: torque In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604080346.k383krQH018602@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-04-07 23:46 EST ------- An attempt to build this RPM: http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~garrick/torque-2.1.0p0-0.3.200604071240.src.rpm in mock (FC4 i386) resulted in this error: RPM build errors: File must begin with "/": %{_desktopdir}/*.desktop -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 04:01:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 00:01:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188105] Review Request: torque In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604080401.k3841VlL020188@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 ------- Additional Comments From garrick at usc.edu 2006-04-08 00:01 EST ------- Bah! _desktopdir is defined by jpackage-utils. Updated http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~garrick/torque.spec changes that to %{_datadir}/applications -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From Matt_Domsch at dell.com Sat Apr 8 04:17:56 2006 From: Matt_Domsch at dell.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 23:17:56 -0500 Subject: can't build anything locally in mock on FC4 In-Reply-To: References: <1144462476.26196.15.camel@ernie> Message-ID: <20060408041756.GA26966@lists.us.dell.com> On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 09:22:47PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>> "EH" == Ed Hill writes: > > EH> Is there something I can do locally to fix this? The local mock > EH> builds have always been slow for me but this is really > EH> frustrating... > > It's much faster and reliable if you have a local mirror. That's > pretty much all you can do to ensure that you can talk to a host that > has the packages. You need a bit over 2.5GB to mirror FC4 i386 and about > 3.3GB to mirror FC5 i386. You can also set up a local squid cache, which accomplishes much the same as a local mirror, at a fraction of the whole repo size. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/MockTricks -- Matt Domsch Software Architect Dell Linux Solutions linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux Linux on Dell mailing lists @ http://lists.us.dell.com From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 05:39:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 01:39:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188309] Review Request: conserver - serial console server daemon/client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604080539.k385daVR032687@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: conserver - serial console server daemon/client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188309 ------- Additional Comments From jima at auroralinux.org 2006-04-08 01:39 EST ------- Added LICENSE to %doc. Thanks for the suggestion; it should have been there. Will commit when I have time to set it all up. Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 8 06:00:47 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 02:00:47 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060408060047.DFAFB7FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 5 blacs-1.1-20.fc3 blacs-1.1-21.fc3 blacs-1.1-22.fc3 fortune-firefly-2.1.1-1.fc3 perl-Template-Toolkit-2.14-8.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 8 06:00:57 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 02:00:57 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060408060057.851947FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 6 blacs-1.1-20.fc4 blacs-1.1-21.fc4 blacs-1.1-22.fc4 fortune-firefly-2.1.1-1.fc4 perl-Imager-0.50-1.fc4 perl-Template-Toolkit-2.14-8.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 8 06:01:09 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 02:01:09 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060408060109.EA1CE7FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 4 blacs-1.1-22.fc5 celestia-1.4.1-1.fc5 perl-Imager-0.50-1.fc5 perl-Template-Toolkit-2.14-8.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 8 06:02:38 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 02:02:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060408060238.B1F977FE1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 7 blacs-1.1-22.fc6 celestia-1.4.1-1.fc6 cgi-util-2.2.1-7 fortune-firefly-2.1.1-1.fc6 perl-Imager-0.50-1.fc6 perl-Kwiki-RecentChanges-0.14-1.fc6 perl-Template-Toolkit-2.14-8.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 06:18:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 02:18:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188204] Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604080618.k386I3eA004458@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188204 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-08 02:18 EST ------- Thats strange it works fine over here, can you do a strace on it for me? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 06:25:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 02:25:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188204] Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604080625.k386PkTQ005296@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188204 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-08 02:25 EST ------- Hmm, I really can't find anything that explains this, can you see if: /usr/share/crystal-stacker/ce.dat is in place? It is in the specfile so it should be. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 06:39:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 02:39:10 -0400 Subject: [Bug 165314] Review Request: kismet -- A WLAN detector, sniffer and IDS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604080639.k386dAs1007534@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kismet -- A WLAN detector, sniffer and IDS https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165314 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-08 02:38 EST ------- Sorry I somehow never got a bugzilla mail on your update I'll do a full review of your new version soon. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 06:54:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 02:54:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185721] Review Request: yadex - Doom level/wad editor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604080654.k386sQt6009369@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: yadex - Doom level/wad editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185721 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-08 02:54 EST ------- Any progress on this? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Sat Apr 8 07:08:57 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 08:08:57 +0100 Subject: gonvert and gdeskcal - last calls Message-ID: <1144480137.3485.5.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, Final chance to object to me de-orphaning these packages. Please shout/scream/sing very loudly/poke me with a hot fork/cover me in butter and call me Doris if you're adverse to this happening. I'll be rebuilding at about 1300hrs British Summer Time. TTFN Paul -- "ein zu starker starker Anblick kann Sie toten. Sie gegen gerade uber den Rand mit dem festen Wissen des Wege vor Ihnen" - Linus Torvals -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From lists at timj.co.uk Sat Apr 8 07:16:37 2006 From: lists at timj.co.uk (Tim Jackson) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 08:16:37 +0100 Subject: Updating a package in multiple branches In-Reply-To: <44352A4C.40605@city-fan.org> References: <4435284A.7070601@timj.co.uk> <44352A4C.40605@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <44376355.8000201@timj.co.uk> Paul Howarth wrote: > Tim Jackson wrote: >> I've just successfully updated altermime in the devel branch from >> 0.3.6-0.3.7, following the instructions on >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsingCvsFaq . That's cool, but >> now I need to update the FC-4 and FC-5 branches. Do I have to repeat >> the whole process for each branch (including uploading the package >> source tarball again) > I do pretty much the same thing for each branch. The source upload takes > no time at all though, as it's skipped if the file is already present in > the lookaside cache, so all that step does is to update the "sources" > and ".cvsignore" files. OK. In that case, can't the sources file just be copied from the devel branch? Anyway, thanks for the advice - you confirmed what I thought. Very useful. Tim From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Sat Apr 8 07:17:50 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 09:17:50 +0200 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-05 In-Reply-To: <1144430295.2800.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060405173942.19376.18329@faldor.intranet> <20060405230453.52fb2d99@alkaid.a.lan> <20060405234854.b4773cc3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060407084340.2ed2869b@alkaid.a.lan> <1144430295.2800.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060408091750.7f6db68f@alkaid.a.lan> On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 20:18:15 +0300 "Ville Skytt?" wrote: > lcms installs files outside of %{_libdir}, for example to /usr/bin. Can > both i386 and x86_64 of it be installed on FC[34] x86_64 boxes, or does > trying to do that result in conflicts? What about the lcms-devel and > python-lcms subpackages? Well I don't know don't have any x86_64 boxes with fc3 or fc4 anymore. I don't think python-lcms or lcms-devel is needed. Could somebody please test this. If it does not work maybe an easier solution would be not pushing that wine subpackage... - Andreas -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 173 5803043 | mail preferred -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 08:05:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 04:05:41 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182941] Review Request: nessus-core Network vulnerability scanner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604080805.k3885fvP024185@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nessus-core Network vulnerability scanner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182941 andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de 2006-04-08 04:05 EST ------- Thanks for the review. Build and pushed :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 08:05:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 04:05:45 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185799] Review Request: nessus-plugins-GPL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604080805.k3885j5Z024244@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nessus-plugins-GPL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185799 Bug 185799 depends on bug 182941, which changed state. Bug 182941 Summary: Review Request: nessus-core Network vulnerability scanner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182941 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From lists at timj.co.uk Sat Apr 8 08:37:30 2006 From: lists at timj.co.uk (Tim Jackson) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 09:37:30 +0100 Subject: PHP documentation package Message-ID: <4437764A.6030300@timj.co.uk> I can't see a php-doc, php-manual or similar package either in Core or Extras which contains the complete PHP manual (/usr/share/doc/php-x is READMEs and suchlike only, not unreasonably as the main manual is huge and deserves a separate package) Is anyone already working on this? If not, can anyone see any immediate objections to a php-manual package for Extras? Tim From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 09:20:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 05:20:04 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188351] New: Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188351 Summary: Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: rpm at timj.co.uk QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/specs/gphpedit.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/srpms/gphpedit-0.9.80-1.src.rpm Description: gPHPEdit is a GNOME2 editor dedicated to editing PHP files and other supporting files like HTML/CSS. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 8 09:50:28 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 09:50:28 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-08 Message-ID: <20060408095028.9363.7689@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch wine-cms 0.9.11-2.fc3.i386 ====================================================================== package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: wine-cms - 0.9.11-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: liblcms.so.1 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: pyxdg From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 8 09:50:36 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 09:50:36 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-08 Message-ID: <20060408095036.9393.29925@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch wine-cms 0.9.11-2.fc4.i386 ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: wine-cms - 0.9.11-2.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: liblcms.so.1 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 8 09:50:48 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 09:50:48 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-08 Message-ID: <20060408095048.9397.62393@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 8 09:50:53 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 09:50:53 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-08 Message-ID: <20060408095053.9401.36449@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113()(64bit) package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0()(64bit) libglade gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 From qspencer at ieee.org Sat Apr 8 11:00:00 2006 From: qspencer at ieee.org (Quentin Spencer) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 11:00:00 -0000 Subject: Strange build failure Message-ID: <4419B4DB.60403@ieee.org> I don't know what to make of the build logs at: http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/6430-octave-2.9.4-8.fc5/ppc/ build.log is empty, job.log says: Job failed due to build errors! Please see build logs. and root.log ends with: Total download size: 74 M Cleaning up... Done. So, what just happened? From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 11:22:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 07:22:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179852] /dev/std* missing in mock - FE buildsystem In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604081122.k38BM3u4024452@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: /dev/std* missing in mock - FE buildsystem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179852 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-04-08 07:21 EST ------- When will the latest mock be installed in the FE buildsys in order to see progress here? $ rpm -q mock mock-0.4-8.fc4 ==> Cannot reproduce any build problems due to /dev/stdin ==> It's the mock version which creates /dev{/stdin,/stdout,/stderr} ==> In the chroot, I see correct symlinks and /proc is mounted, too: + ls -la /dev /proc /dev: total 8 drwxr-sr-x 3 mockbuild 102 4096 Apr 8 07:19 . drwxr-sr-x 21 mockbuild 102 4096 Apr 8 06:52 .. lrwxrwxrwx 1 mockbuild 102 15 Apr 8 06:39 fd -> ../proc/self/fd crw-rw-rw- 1 root 102 1, 7 Apr 8 06:39 full prw------- 1 root root 0 Apr 27 2005 initctl crw-rw-rw- 1 root 102 1, 3 Apr 8 06:39 null crw-rw-rw- 1 root 102 5, 2 Apr 8 06:39 ptmx drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Apr 8 04:05 pts crw-r--r-- 1 root 102 1, 9 Apr 8 06:39 random lrwxrwxrwx 1 mockbuild 102 17 Apr 8 07:19 stderr -> ../proc/self/fd/2 lrwxrwxrwx 1 mockbuild 102 17 Apr 8 07:19 stdin -> ../proc/self/fd/0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 mockbuild 102 17 Apr 8 07:19 stdout -> ../proc/self/fd/1 crw-rw-rw- 1 root 102 5, 0 Apr 8 06:39 tty crw-r--r-- 1 root 102 1, 9 Apr 8 06:39 urandom crw-rw-rw- 1 root 102 1, 5 Apr 8 06:39 zero /proc: total 786378 dr-xr-xr-x 124 root root 0 May 23 2005 . drwxr-sr-x 21 mockbuild 102 4096 Apr 8 06:52 .. dr-xr-xr-x 5 root root 0 Apr 8 07:19 1 dr-xr-xr-x 5 root root 0 Apr 8 07:19 10 [-snip-] dr-xr-xr-x 5 mockbuild mockbuild 0 Apr 8 07:19 21932 [-snip-] lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 64 Apr 8 07:19 self -> 21932 [-snip-] $ rpm -q mock mock-0.4-6.fc4 ==> Cannot reproduce any problems with /dev/stdin either just to ==> confirm Andreas' observations from on 2006-02-04 -- the strace'd ==> elinks does NOT look for /dev/stdin here -- so whatever ==> happens in the Fedora Extras FC-4 buildsys is not reproducible ==> with a local mock build on FC-4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 8 11:32:27 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 13:32:27 +0200 Subject: Strange build failure In-Reply-To: <4419B4DB.60403@ieee.org> References: <4419B4DB.60403@ieee.org> Message-ID: <20060408133227.bc65edbc.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 12:56:27 -0600, Quentin Spencer wrote: > I don't know what to make of the build logs at: > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/6430-octave-2.9.4-8.fc5/ppc/ > > build.log is empty, job.log says: > > Job failed due to build errors! Please see build logs. > > > and root.log ends with: > > Total download size: 74 M > Cleaning up... > Done. > > So, what just happened? Since I just received this old message, this is what the server says: http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=6430 6430 (octave): Build on target fedora-development-extras was killed by qspencer ieee org. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 11:28:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 07:28:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187326] Review Request: smokeping - Network latency grapher In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604081128.k38BSc2T025300@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smokeping - Network latency grapher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187326 ------- Additional Comments From yaneti at declera.com 2006-04-08 07:28 EST ------- comments from a total selinux newbie perspective. It does not seem to be ready for an apache running under enforcing selinux policy. I bumped into this under FC4. The first symptom was "ERROR: /etc/smokeping/config, line 11: Directory '/var/lib/smokeping/images' does not exist" Had to change the context of the cgi script and the data and imgcache directories. Also AFAIK from a selinux perspective its better for the pid file to be in its own directory eg. /var/run/smokeping/smokeping.pid which requires changes to the default config. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From gauret at free.fr Sat Apr 8 11:37:45 2006 From: gauret at free.fr (Aurelien Bompard) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 13:37:45 +0200 Subject: Updating a package in multiple branches References: <4435284A.7070601@timj.co.uk> <44352A4C.40605@city-fan.org> <44376355.8000201@timj.co.uk> Message-ID: Tim Jackson wrote: > OK. In that case, can't the sources file just be copied from the devel > branch? Yeah, that's what I usually do and it works fine. - make changes in devel - cd .. - cp devel/{package.spec,sources,.cvsignore} FC-5/ ( - cp devel/{package.spec,sources,.cvsignore} FC-4/ ) - cvs ci -m "fixed bug XXX" - make tag build -C devel - make tag build -C FC-5 ( - make tag build -C FC-4 ) You get the idea. A. -- http://aurelien.bompard.org ~~~~ Jabber : abompard at jabber.fr A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right. Q: Why should i start my reply below the quoted text ? From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 13:27:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 09:27:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188359] New: Review Request: bugzilla - bug tracking tool Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188359 Summary: Review Request: bugzilla - bug tracking tool Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: jwb at redhat.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com SPEC: http://www.berningeronline.net/bugzilla.spec SRPM: http://www.berningeronline.net/bugzilla-2.20-0.1cvs20060407.src.rpm Description: Bugzilla is a popular open-source bug tracking tool -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 15:34:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 11:34:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 169704] Review Request: mosml - Moscow ML In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604081534.k38FYco6024918@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mosml - Moscow ML https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169704 ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-04-08 11:34 EST ------- That site does not seem to be up now for some reason. However, QPL and LGPL are both OSI approved, a good sign. http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ It would be best to check the actual text though. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 15:49:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 11:49:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188204] Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604081549.k38Fnnmc026882@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188204 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-08 11:49 EST ------- This file is in place, but it's not the file that the theme editor is looking for. strace shows that it's looking for this file in the original RPM_BUILD_ROOT location: stat64("/var/tmp/crystal-stacker-1.5-0.pre.2-root-wart/usr/share/crystal-stacker/ce.dat", 0xbfe08650) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 16:15:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 12:15:19 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177232] Review Request: regionset - reads/sets the region code of DVD drives In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604081615.k38GFJnI029850@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: regionset - reads/sets the region code of DVD drives https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177232 ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-04-08 12:15 EST ------- Almost there. Still need macros instead of /usr/sbin in %install -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 16:41:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 12:41:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] New: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: frank-buettner at gmx.net QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/ctapi-cyberjack-2.0.8.spec?download SRPM Name or Url: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/ctapi-cyberjack-2.0.8-1.FC4.src.rpm?download Description: This is an lib to use the Reiner SCT SmartCard reader's under Fedora. I have build an new package because the orignal rpm packages from Reiner SCT are to buggy for Fedora. And the the new version 2.0.10 of Reiner SCT will not run on FC 4/5. So I have build an packge with 2.0.8 for FC. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From tibbs at math.uh.edu Sat Apr 8 17:21:13 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 12:21:13 -0500 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-05 In-Reply-To: <20060408091750.7f6db68f@alkaid.a.lan> (Andreas Bierfert's message of "Sat, 8 Apr 2006 09:17:50 +0200") References: <20060405173942.19376.18329@faldor.intranet> <20060405230453.52fb2d99@alkaid.a.lan> <20060405234854.b4773cc3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060407084340.2ed2869b@alkaid.a.lan> <1144430295.2800.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060408091750.7f6db68f@alkaid.a.lan> Message-ID: >>>>> "AB" == Andreas Bierfert writes: AB> Well I don't know don't have any x86_64 boxes with fc3 or fc4 AB> anymore. I don't think python-lcms or lcms-devel is needed. Could AB> somebody please test this. If it does not work maybe an easier AB> solution would be not pushing that wine subpackage... I have several FC3 and FC4 x86_64 boxes around; what exactly needs to be tested? I installed the lcms packages from both i386 and x86_64 and rpm didn't complain about conflicts. I installed the i386 package last, but the binaries are still the 64-bit versions. I guess RPM has special methods for dealing with that kind of thing. - J< From qspencer at ieee.org Sat Apr 8 17:40:34 2006 From: qspencer at ieee.org (Quentin Spencer) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 12:40:34 -0500 Subject: Strange build failure In-Reply-To: <20060408133227.bc65edbc.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <4419B4DB.60403@ieee.org> <20060408133227.bc65edbc.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <4437F592.3030709@ieee.org> Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 12:56:27 -0600, Quentin Spencer wrote: > > >> I don't know what to make of the build logs at: >> http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/6430-octave-2.9.4-8.fc5/ppc/ >> >> build.log is empty, job.log says: >> >> Job failed due to build errors! Please see build logs. >> >> >> and root.log ends with: >> >> Total download size: 74 M >> Cleaning up... >> Done. >> >> So, what just happened? >> > > Since I just received this old message, this is what the server says: > > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=6430 > > 6430 (octave): Build on target fedora-development-extras was killed by qspencer ieee org. > > I can't even remember what the problem was, but I think it was resolved. I don't know where the e-mail was for the last 3 weeks. A hiccup on the part of the SMTP server I was using or something. -Quentin From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 17:34:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 13:34:40 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188204] Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604081734.k38HYeKm007950@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188204 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-08 13:34 EST ------- Hmm, That is most likely because the C-file involved got compiled (again) during make install where PREFIX is set to $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_prefix} so I smell a time skew problem here, are you using a network filesystem or maybe a filesystem with low res timestamps or running some kinda time sync software? Anyways try a rebuild that should fix it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 18:42:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 14:42:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182254] Review Request: SS5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604081842.k38Igaj5022051@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SS5 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182254 ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-04-08 14:42 EST ------- Not building on x86_64: Processing files: ss5-3.5.4-2 error: File not found: /var/tmp/ss5-3.5.4-2-root-mockbuild/usr/lib64/ss5 Processing files: ss5-debuginfo-3.5.4-2 error: Could not open %files file /builddir/build/BUILD/ss5-3.5.4/debugfiles.list: No such file or directory Looks like both 64 bit and the automatic debuginfo package are not working. The init script still is enabled by default. You need to edit it and change the chkconfig line to something like - 20 80. Then delete the "chkconfig --level - ss5 on" line from the spec. See chkconfig man page for reference. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 19:16:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 15:16:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182064] Review Request: facter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604081916.k38JGcHY028492@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: facter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182064 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |jpmahowald at gmail.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-04-08 15:16 EST ------- The source in the srpm must match the URL in the source tag. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines I can sponsor if still needed. Apply for cvsextras. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 19:19:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 15:19:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188376] New: Review Request: perl-Test-Tester Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188376 Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Tester Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: steve at silug.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Test-Tester/perl-Test-Tester.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Test-Tester-0.103-1.src.rpm Description: If you have written a test module based on Test::Builder then Test::Tester allows you to test it with the minimum of effort. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 19:30:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 15:30:08 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188378] New: Review Request: perl-Test-NoWarnings Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188378 Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-NoWarnings Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: steve at silug.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Test-NoWarnings/perl-Test-NoWarnings.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Test-NoWarnings-0.082-1.src.rpm Description: In general, your tests shouldn't produce warnings. This modules causes any warnings to be captured and stored. It automatically adds an extra test that will run when your script ends to check that there were no warnings. If there were any warings, the test will give a "not ok" and diagnostics of where, when and what the warning was, including a stack trace of what was going on when the it occurred. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 19:37:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 15:37:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188380] New: Review Request: perl-Test-Deep Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188380 Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Deep Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: steve at silug.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Test-Deep/perl-Test-Deep.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Test-Deep-0.093-1.src.rpm Description: Test::Deep gives you very flexible ways to check that the result you got is the result you were expecting. At it's simplest it compares two structures by going through each level, ensuring that the values match, that arrays and hashes have the same elements and that references are blessed into the correct class. It also handles circular data structures without getting caught in an infinite loop. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 20:05:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 16:05:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181831] Review Request: bitbake - Build Tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082005.k38K5r2o002734@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bitbake - Build Tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181831 jpmahowald at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |jpmahowald at gmail.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com 2006-04-08 16:05 EST ------- Do not use /usr/%{_lib} when specifying python's site-packages. Instead, install fedora-rpmdevtools and use fedora-newrpmspec --type python. This template has a %python_sitelib macro for this, which evaluates to /usr/lib on x86_64 for architecture independent packages like this one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Sat Apr 8 20:46:24 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 22:46:24 +0200 Subject: FE Package Status of Apr 8, 2006 Message-ID: <200604082046.k38KkaQR025781@mx3.redhat.com> Hi folks, Here's this week's status. Some increase in FE-NEW tickets, and still quite a bunch waiting for sponsors... Also, please don't forget to add your packages in the owners.list file. Cheers, Christian --- FE Package Status of Apr 8, 2006 The full report can be found here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/PackageStatus Owners file stats: - 1564 packages - 59 orphans - 40 packages not available in extras devel or release andreas at bawue dot net dd_rescue cgoorah at yahoo dot com dot au kadischi chrisw at redhat dot com git-core davidhart at tqmcube dot com leafnode dennis at ausil dot us cryptplug dreadyman at gmail dot com yakuake fredrik at dolda2000 dot com icmpdn gauret at free dot fr elmo gemi at bluewin dot ch inti gemi at bluewin dot ch drscheme ghenry at suretecsystems dot com gnome-applet-netmon ghenry at suretecsystems dot com rsnapshot ivazquez at ivazquez dot net gnome-theme-clearlooks ivazquez at ivazquez dot net gpredict jcarpenter at condell dot org thinkpad-kmod-common jcarpenter at condell dot org thinkpad-kmod jcarpenter at condell dot org tpctl jcarpenter at condell dot org configure-thinkpad jvdias at redhat dot com webmin matthias at rpmforge dot net php-pecl-sqlite matthias at rpmforge dot net fillets-ng-data-cs matthias at rpmforge dot net php-mmcache notting at redhat dot com comps sgrubb at redhat dot com libsafe tcallawa at redhat dot com R-RScaLAPACK tcallawa at redhat dot com libgdamm tcallawa at redhat dot com R-hdf5 tcallawa at redhat dot com stripesnoop tcallawa at redhat dot com compat-wxPythonGTK2 tcallawa at redhat dot com lout tcallawa at redhat dot com pam_pkcs11 tcallawa at redhat dot com opendap toniw at iki dot fi silky toniw at iki dot fi libmatchbox ville dot skytta at iki dot fi lirc-kmod-common ville dot skytta at iki dot fi lirc-kmod wtogami at redhat dot com openoffice-extras wtogami at redhat dot com iiimf-le-simplehangul zipsonic at gmail dot com nx zipsonic at gmail dot com freenx - 2 packages which have not yet been FE-APPROVE'd... https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_id=184080,187186 webmin Jason Vas Dias up-imapproxy David Rees - 9 packages present in the development repo which have no owners entry bcm43xx-fwcutter fuse-emulator git ikvm jthread lcov libtomoe-gtk perl-Text-CHM wxPythonGTK2 - 15 orphaned packages, yet available in extras devel apt duplicity gtkglarea2 lua ots perl-Chart perl-Convert-BinHex perl-IO-stringy perl-MIME-tools perl-MailTools perl-Net-Netmask perl-XML-DOM perl-XML-RegExp perl-XML-XPath perl-XML-XQL - 36 packages that moved to core Packages appearing both in Core and Extras: - 1 packages duplicated for FC5: tcallawa at redhat dot com check - 1 packages duplicated for devel: tcallawa at redhat dot com check FE-ACCEPT packages stats: - 649 accepted, closed package reviews - 3 accepted, closed package reviews not in repo - 9 accepted, closed package reviews not in owners - 1 accepted, open package reviews older than 4 weeks; - 8 accepted, open package reviews with a package already in the repo FE-REVIEW packages stats: - 77 open tickets - 15 tickets with no activity in eight weeks - 15 tickets with no activity in four weeks - 2 closed tickets FE-NEW packages stats: - 155 open tickets - 25 tickets with no activity in eight weeks - 25 tickets with no activity in four weeks - 4 closed tickets FE-NEEDSPONSOR packages stats: - 32 open tickets - 15 tickets with no activity in eight weeks - 4 tickets with no activity in four weeks FE-LEGAL packages stats: - 1 open tickets OPEN-BUGS packages stats: - 200 open tickets - 61 tickets with no activity in eight weeks - 33 tickets with no activity in four weeks CVS stats: - 1547 packages with a devel directory - 12 packages with no owners entry bcm43xx-fwcutter fuse-emulator git ikvm initng jthread kile-i18n lcov libtomoe-gtk perl-Gtk2-Spell perl-Maypole perl-Text-CHM - 2 packages in CVS devel *and* Core check libevent Maintainers stats: - 170 maintainers - 2 inactive maintainers with open bugs From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 20:42:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 16:42:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182040] Review Request: ratpoison - simplified keyboard-only window manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082042.k38KgVGe007824@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ratpoison - simplified keyboard-only window manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182040 ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-04-08 16:42 EST ------- The spec in comment #8 seems to be the old spec, but the new one is in the src.rpm, so no problems. ;) fc4 now builds ok, but fc5 and devel fail with: gcc -O2 -g -march=i386 -mcpu=i686 -Wall -O2 -o ratpoison actions.o bar.o completions.o communications.o editor.o events.o format.o frame.o getopt.o getopt1.o globals.o group.o history.o hook.o input.o linkedlist.o main.o manage.o number.o sbuf.o screen.o split.o window.o xinerama.o -lXinerama -lXext -lX11 -lhistory actions.o: In function `cmd_rathold': /home/kevin/rpm/BUILD/ratpoison-1.4.0/src/actions.c:3032: undefined reference to `XTestFakeButtonEvent' /home/kevin/rpm/BUILD/ratpoison-1.4.0/src/actions.c:3030: undefined reference to `XTestFakeButtonEvent' actions.o: In function `cmd_ratclick': /home/kevin/rpm/BUILD/ratpoison-1.4.0/src/actions.c:3012: undefined reference to `XTestFakeButtonEvent' /home/kevin/rpm/BUILD/ratpoison-1.4.0/src/actions.c:3013: undefined reference to `XTestFakeButtonEvent' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[2]: *** [ratpoison] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/kevin/rpm/BUILD/ratpoison-1.4.0/src' make[1]: *** [all] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/kevin/rpm/BUILD/ratpoison-1.4.0/src' make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.43773 (%build) Looks like a missing BuildRequires: libXtst-devel (for fc5, devel only ) The install-info lines aren't quite right, resulting in: Preparing... ########################################### [100%] 1:ratpoison ########################################### [100%] install-info: No dir file specified; try --help for more information. Please look at the Texinfo section of the scriptlets page: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ScriptletSnippets Those are the last two blockers I see. Fix those up and I would be happy to approve the package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 20:44:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 16:44:08 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186264] Review Request: bcm43xx-fwcutter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082044.k38Ki8ir008068@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bcm43xx-fwcutter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186264 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-04-08 16:43 EST ------- Please add the package in owners.list -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 20:45:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 16:45:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 165833] Review Request: git-core In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082045.k38KjPuf008214@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: git-core https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165833 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-04-08 16:45 EST ------- Please rename the git-core entry in owners.list to git -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 20:46:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 16:46:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177247] Review Request: jthread In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082046.k38KkrDW008504@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jthread https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177247 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-04-08 16:46 EST ------- Please add the package in owners.list -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 20:51:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 16:51:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 166960] Review Request: Fuse-emulator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082051.k38KpxEi009147@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Fuse-emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166960 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-04-08 16:51 EST ------- Please add the package in owners.list -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 20:52:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 16:52:50 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178903] Review Request: ikvm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082052.k38KqoZK009252@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ikvm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178903 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-04-08 16:52 EST ------- Please add the package in owners.list -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 20:54:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 16:54:06 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185266] Review Request: perl-Text-CHM Perl extension for handling MS Compiled HtmlHelp Files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082054.k38Ks6PS009419@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Text-CHM Perl extension for handling MS Compiled HtmlHelp Files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185266 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-04-08 16:53 EST ------- Please add the package in owners.list -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 20:54:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 16:54:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188105] Review Request: torque In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082054.k38KsQ9M009504@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-04-08 16:54 EST ------- Hi Garrick, using your latest spec and the patch above I put together: http://mitgcm.org/eh3/fedora_misc/torque-2.1.0p0-0.4.200604071240.src.rpm md5sum: 2470a40280b9b65d6b49c9fffe5f46bb torque-2.1.0p0-0.4.200604071240.src.rpm which builds locally (and probably in mock since it worked with a very similar previous version). In any case, heres the rpmlint output: W: torque invalid-license Freely redistributable (See PBS_License.txt) [repeated many times] -- probably OK to ignore since the license does appear to satisfy the Fedora requirements W: torque no-documentation [repeated many times] -- OK to ignore W: torque incoherent-version-in-changelog 2.1.0p0-0.3.200604071240 2.1.0p0-0.4.200604071240 the naming does not exactly follow the pattern in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines but it is pretty close -- could you please use the "YYYYMMDDcvs" pattern per the guidelines? E: torque no-binary E: torque non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/spool 01777 W: torque non-standard-dir-in-var torque probably OK to ignore W: torque-client unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/sbin/pbs_iff E: torque-client setuid-binary /usr/sbin/pbs_iff root 04755 E: torque-client non-standard-executable-perm /usr/sbin/pbs_iff 04755 These are worrisome. The unstripped binary can probably be fixed in the rpm build somehow. And does the /usr/sbin/pbs_iff really need to be suid? E: torque-mom non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/checkpoint 0700 E: torque-mom non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/undelivered 01777 E: torque-mom non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/mom_priv/jobs 0751 W: torque-mom non-standard-dir-in-var torque W: torque-mom incoherent-init-script-name pbs_mom E: torque-scheduler non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/sched_priv 0750 W: torque-scheduler non-standard-dir-in-var torque W: torque-scheduler incoherent-init-script-name pbs_sched E: torque-server non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/server_priv/acl_groups 0750 E: torque-server non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/server_priv/queues 0750 E: torque-server non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/server_priv 0750 E: torque-server non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/server_priv/acl_hosts 0750 E: torque-server non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/server_priv/acl_users 0750 E: torque-server non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/server_priv/acl_svr 0750 E: torque-server non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/server_priv/jobs 0750 W: torque-server non-standard-dir-in-var torque W: torque-server incoherent-init-script-name pbs_server The above can probably (?) be ignored. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 20:55:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 16:55:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181444] Review Request: lcov -- process gcov output into nice html pages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082055.k38Kt0HN009556@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lcov -- process gcov output into nice html pages https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181444 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-04-08 16:54 EST ------- Please add the package in owners.list -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 20:56:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 16:56:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172343] Review Request: libtomoe-gtk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082056.k38Kuxeb009832@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libtomoe-gtk https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172343 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-04-08 16:56 EST ------- Please add the package in owners.list -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 21:00:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 17:00:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185407] Review Request: pwgen - Automatic password generation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082100.k38L0Nui010263@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pwgen - Automatic password generation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185407 Christian.Iseli at licr.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-04-08 17:00 EST ------- Moved blocker to FE-ACCEPT. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 21:10:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 17:10:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 165689] Review Request: SquidGuard: filter, redirector and access controller plugin for squid In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082110.k38LAV0m011426@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SquidGuard: filter, redirector and access controller plugin for squid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165689 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-04-08 17:10 EST ------- So, given this ticket is now closed and a squidGuard packages is in FE 5 and devel, are we all agreed that the blocker should now be FE-ACCEPT ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 21:13:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 17:13:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185266] Review Request: perl-Text-CHM Perl extension for handling MS Compiled HtmlHelp Files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082113.k38LDG7l011777@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Text-CHM Perl extension for handling MS Compiled HtmlHelp Files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185266 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-08 17:13 EST ------- done. Thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 21:24:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 17:24:58 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182040] Review Request: ratpoison - simplified keyboard-only window manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082124.k38LOwLa013062@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ratpoison - simplified keyboard-only window manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182040 ------- Additional Comments From jwb at redhat.com 2006-04-08 17:24 EST ------- Fixed up in new packages: SPEC: http://www.berningeronline.net/ratpoison.spec SRPM: http://www.berningeronline.net/ratpoison-1.4.0-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 21:42:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 17:42:02 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182040] Review Request: ratpoison - simplified keyboard-only window manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082142.k38Lg2xq015851@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ratpoison - simplified keyboard-only window manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182040 kevin at tummy.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-04-08 17:41 EST ------- Looking good. I did run one last rpmlint and it outputs: W: ratpoison devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/ratpoison/unrat.c E: ratpoison script-without-shellbang /usr/share/ratpoison/unrat.c E: ratpoison script-without-shellbang /usr/share/ratpoison/ratpoison.el W: ratpoison devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/ratpoison/sloppy.c E: ratpoison script-without-shellbang /usr/share/ratpoison/sloppy.c E: ratpoison script-without-shellbang /usr/share/xsessions/ratpoison.desktop You might want to chmod 644 those .c/.el files, they shouldn't need to be executable. You can go ahead and do that before you import it... Everything looks good aside from that, so this package is approved. If you still need a sponsor, I would be happy to sponsor you. You should be able to continue the process from the "Get a Fedora Account" step from the http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors page. If you have any questions feel free to drop me an email. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 21:51:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 17:51:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188204] Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082151.k38LpWYa016982@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188204 wart at kobold.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-08 17:51 EST ------- Yep, the clock in my build machine was behind by several days. Once I reset it then the packages were fine. Here's the full review: MUST ==== * rpmlint output clean * spec file named appropriately * source matches upstream d961dfdc859267b2763f4b585a732f3e cs15src.zip * License (freeware) ok, license file included, license change discussion (to remove non-commercial use clause) included and ok. * No excessive BR: * Compiles, builds, and runs on FC-5 i386 * No locales * No shared libraries * No -devel package * No libtool archives * .desktop file included and installed correctly * Scriptlets are sane * Owns directories that it creates * Contains code and acceptable content APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 22:26:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 18:26:41 -0400 Subject: [Bug 184080] Review Request: webmin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082226.k38MQf6r021126@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: webmin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184080 ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-04-08 18:26 EST ------- Here's A prelim review: MUST items: See below - rpmlint output OK - Package name. OK - Spec file name matches. See below - Package guidelines. See below - License. See below - License field matches in spec. See below - License included in files. OK - Spec in american english. OK - md5sum of source from upstream c45fe387902405cb36a1a5c6a240ad0d webmin-1.260.tar.gz c45fe387902405cb36a1a5c6a240ad0d webmin-1.260.tar.gz.1 OK - Compiles and builds on one arch at least. OK - No forbidden buildrequires included See below - Owns all directories it creates. OK - No duplicate files in %files listing. See below - Permissions on files correct. See below - Clean section correct. OK - Macros consistant. OK - Code not content. OK - Doesn't own any files/dirs that are already owned by other packages. Items needing attention: Given the number of issues here, (and I didn't even finish looking through everything), perhaps it would be better to start off with a clean spec generated from 'fedora-newrpmspec -t perl -o webmin.spec' and build from there? Let me know how you want to move forward. 1. Don't use 'fe5' in release, instead use %{?dist} tag. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag 2. Don't include a 'Vendor' tag. It gets set by the build system. 3. You shouldn't need the [ "%{buildroot}" != "/" ] in the %clean section. 4. You shouldn't "echo "Running uninstall scripts .."" in the un-install. rpm shouldn't output anything to stdout. There are several other places with echos that should be removed. 5. You copy the /etc/webmin dir to a backup, is that likely to be large? rpm can't account for that space when it says ok to the install, so if the disk is close to full, wouldn't that cause a nasty failure? 6. version 1.270 is now out. 7. so the LICENSE file is BSD, but it looks like several of the modules have GPL headers on them. Doesn't that mean the entire package has to be distributed under the GPL? 8. There is quite a lot of rpmlint output. (around 250 lines) available on request. 9. You create/remove the /var/webmin dir in post/postun/triggers. This is not acceptable. You must include it in files. Does this have log files and other state? You shouldn't delete it on package removal. 10. The run-setup.sh script needs a LOT of work. It runs perl commands on stdin? It checks for about 100 diffrent types of OSes, which this package will know is fedora. It ends up just running /usr/libexec/webmin/setup.sh with some env set. Perhaps you could re-write it as a clean/simple perl/shell script? 11. Why are you doing "%define __spec_install_post %{nil}" ? 12. Why 'mkdir -p %{buildroot}/etc/rc.d/{rc0.d,rc1.d,rc2.d,rc3.d,rc5.d,rc6.d}' ? You don't install anything there, and chkconfig should handle that on install. 13. /usr/libexec/webmin/run-uninstalls.pl is totally unacceptable. It asks if the user wants to un-install webmin and then runs 'rpm -e --nodeps webmin'This would be executed from a rpm %preun and totally fail in a lot of ways. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From ndbecker2 at gmail.com Sat Apr 8 23:20:00 2006 From: ndbecker2 at gmail.com (Neal Becker) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 19:20:00 -0400 Subject: fxload srpm available Message-ID: fxload is not included with FC5, but is required for Plextor Convertx PX-TV402. With a couple of minor modifications, I built/tested it. I placed an srpm here: http://nbecker.dyndns.org:8080/fxload-2002_04_11-1.src.rpm Would someone like to adopt this (please)? From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 23:37:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 19:37:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188395] New: Review Request: gnomeradio Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188395 Summary: Review Request: gnomeradio Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: splinux at fedoraproject.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/gnomeradio/gnomeradio.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/gnomeradio/gnomeradio-1.6-1.fc6.src.rpm Description: Gnomeradio is a FM-radio tuner for the GNOME desktop (version 1 and 2). It should work with every FM tuner card that is supported by video4linux. Remote controls are supported via (optional) LIRC-support. Gnomeradio can also record radio as a Wave, MP3 or Ogg files. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 23:39:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 19:39:22 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172343] Review Request: libtomoe-gtk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082339.k38NdMeF030513@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libtomoe-gtk https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172343 ------- Additional Comments From ryo-dairiki at users.sourceforge.net 2006-04-08 19:39 EST ------- > Please add the package in owners.list Done, thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 23:49:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 19:49:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187964] Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082349.k38Nnk12031637@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187964 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-08 19:49 EST ------- I've fixed up the setgid issues and played a few of the games to make sure they work. I changed all references to setregid() to setresgid() and rearranged where this happens in a few of the games. The only one that really needs a second look is 'hack'; the scoreboard location can be specified on the command line or in environment settings, so there's a bit more processing that takes place before running setresgid(). Here is the new package: http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/bsd-games.spec http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/bsd-games-2.17-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 23:53:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 19:53:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188395] Review Request: gnomeradio In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082353.k38NrV6n032060@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomeradio https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188395 bdpepple at ameritech.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-04-08 19:53 EST ------- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 177105 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 8 23:54:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 19:54:05 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177105] Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604082354.k38Ns5aY032264@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177105 bdpepple at ameritech.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |splinux at fedoraproject.org ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-04-08 19:53 EST ------- *** Bug 188395 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From wtogami at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 01:29:28 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 21:29:28 -0400 Subject: fxload srpm available In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <44386378.7040007@redhat.com> Neal Becker wrote: > fxload is not included with FC5, but is required for Plextor Convertx > PX-TV402. With a couple of minor modifications, I built/tested it. I > placed an srpm here: > > http://nbecker.dyndns.org:8080/fxload-2002_04_11-1.src.rpm > > Would someone like to adopt this (please)? > Why don't you want to maintain it in Extras yourself? The only way Fedora will grow is if everyone shares part of the workload. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From Matt_Domsch at dell.com Sun Apr 9 02:00:48 2006 From: Matt_Domsch at dell.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 21:00:48 -0500 Subject: FE Package Status of Apr 8, 2006 In-Reply-To: <200604082046.k38KkaQR025781@mx3.redhat.com> References: <200604082046.k38KkaQR025781@mx3.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060409020048.GA5776@lists.us.dell.com> On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 10:46:24PM +0200, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > - 15 orphaned packages, yet available in extras devel > apt duplicity gtkglarea2 lua ots perl-Chart perl-Convert-BinHex > perl-IO-stringy perl-MIME-tools perl-MailTools perl-Net-Netmask > perl-XML-DOM perl-XML-RegExp perl-XML-XPath perl-XML-XQL On 27 March, Paul Howarth volunteered to take perl-Convert-BinHex perl-IO-stringy perl-MailTools perl-MIME-tools for which I heartily thank him. :-) -- Matt Domsch Software Architect Dell Linux Solutions linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux Linux on Dell mailing lists @ http://lists.us.dell.com From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 01:58:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 21:58:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188400] New: Review Request: ssmtp Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 Summary: Review Request: ssmtp Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://wdl.lug.ro/linux/ssmtp/ssmtp.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://wdl.lug.ro/linux/ssmtp/ssmtp-2.61-1.src.rpm Description: This is sSMTP, a program that replaces sendmail on workstations that should send their mail via the departmental mailhub from which they pick up their mail (via pop, imap, rsmtp, pop_fetch, NFS... or the like). This program accepts mail and sends it to the mailhub, optionally replacing the domain in the From: line with a different one. Thanks for reviewing -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 02:05:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 22:05:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182040] Review Request: ratpoison - simplified keyboard-only window manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604090205.k3925H27016884@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ratpoison - simplified keyboard-only window manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182040 ------- Additional Comments From jwb at redhat.com 2006-04-08 22:05 EST ------- Chmod's done in spec file, waiting for account sponsorship now. Thanks for the help! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 07:44:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 03:44:33 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188204] Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604090744.k397iXMo004426@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: crystal-stacker - Falling blocks, match 3 or more of the same color crystals https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188204 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-09 03:44 EST ------- Thanks, imported and build. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 08:06:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 04:06:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179940] Review Request: ruby-http-access2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604090806.k3986cmX008002@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ruby-http-access2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179940 ------- Additional Comments From oliver.andrich at gmail.com 2006-04-09 04:06 EST ------- Well, I think there is not very much to do, but at the moment I am not capable of doing it myself. I am mostly on the road these days, and I also moved my work to a Mac box. So, I only have a Fedora machine available once a month. May be someone else of the ruby SIG should do the final steps. Otherwise it has to wait for a least a month. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 09:26:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 05:26:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604090926.k399Q3a3005305@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 per.winkvist at uk.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |per.winkvist at uk.com ------- Additional Comments From per.winkvist at uk.com 2006-04-09 05:25 EST ------- Would be nice to have this in FC! Any reason why its not in core/extras? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 09:29:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 05:29:06 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604090929.k399T6vr005712@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 ------- Additional Comments From sundaram at redhat.com 2006-04-09 05:28 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > Would be nice to have this in FC! > Any reason why its not in core/extras? It has not been reviewed for inclusion in Fedora Extras yet. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Sun Apr 9 09:40:10 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 10:40:10 +0100 Subject: [Bug 166960] Review Request: Fuse-emulator In-Reply-To: <200604082051.k38KpxEi009147@www.beta.redhat.com> References: <200604082051.k38KpxEi009147@www.beta.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1144575610.3485.28.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > Summary: Review Request: Fuse-emulator It seems that something happened to the owners.list file as there are quite a few now not in the list which were in the list a week or so back. TTFN Paul -- "Wenn eine gro?e Vision zu gro? ist, kann sie dich t?ten - du ?berschreitest deine Grenzen in der sicheren ?berzeugung, den vor dir liegenden Weg zu kennen." - Linus Torvals -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 09:41:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 05:41:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188410] New: Review Request: phpBB Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188410 Summary: Review Request: phpBB Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: peter at thecodergeek.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://www.thecodergeek.com/downloads/fedora/phpBB.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.thecodergeek.com/downloads/fedora/phpBB-2.0.20-1.src.rpm Description: phpBB is a highly popular web-based forum ("bulletin board") system using PHP and a database backend such as PostgreSQL, MySQL, ODBC, and others. (Without one of these, phpBB will not function.) It has many advanced features such as versatile users/groups permissions management, theoretically limitless forums, categories, and posts, a private messaging system among users, a highly customizable style, and a simple but extensive administrative control panel. With this package, rpmlint complains a little. Two points: Firstly, it gives an error that the scripts do not have shebangs. Since these are PHP scripts meant to be run through mod_php (provided by the php package), this seems safe to ignore. E: phpBB script-without-shellbang /var/www/phpBB2/admin/admin_forums.php E: phpBB script-without-shellbang /var/www/phpBB2/language/lang_english/lang_main.php [...etc...] Secondly, it complains that there is an htaccess file in the distribution: E: phpBB htaccess-file /var/www/phpBB2/cache/.htaccess This is where phpBB stores it cache data, and this .htaccess file explicitly disallows any direct requests for those files. Thus, this seems reasonable to ignore, also. I've tested this on FC4, and mock builds to test it on FC5 and Devel are currently running on my workstation (though it seems like there should be no problem). Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 09:52:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 05:52:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188410] Review Request: phpBB In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604090952.k399qbHU009582@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpBB https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188410 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-09 05:52 EST ------- (In reply to comment #0) > Firstly, it gives an error that the scripts do not have shebangs. Since these > are PHP scripts meant to be run through mod_php Do they need to be executable then? See rpmlint -I script-without-shellbang -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 10:06:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 06:06:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091006.k39A6CKR011626@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ssmtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 pertusus at free.fr changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pertusus at free.fr ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-09 06:06 EST ------- Don't you need a sponsor? If you don't I'll assign that bug to myself, otherwise you should seek a sponsor. Here are my comments, even though I cannot sponsor you: * %configopt is useless, just substitute the value * Shouldn't provide smtpdaemon, as it doesn't accepts mail. You can have a look at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165957#c3 * similarly it is arguable whether it should provide MTA or not * it is useless to provide explicitely files that are allready distributed, namely %{_sbindir}/ssmtp * use consistently %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT * don't install ssmtp in sbindir but in bindir * generate_config_alt shouldn't be called that way, but maybe ssmtp_config * the ssmtp man page shouldn't have an added .ssmtp. And mta-ssmtpconfman and mta-ssmtpman are useless in the alternatives call. * the alternatives --auto seems dubious to me. * %{_sysconfdir}/ssmtp/ should be owned, add in %files %dir %{_sysconfdir}/ssmtp/ * add the release in the changelog entry * [ %{buildroot} != "/" ] is useless * missing Requires(post): %{_sbindir}/alternatives BuildRequires: openssl-devel * the ssmt.stuff.diff seems to be the debian patch for unstable. It should be named like the debian patch in that case, and a comment in the spec file could be usefull. Also I think it is better to base fedora packages on debian unstable for such cases, it seems it is what you did, but in that case I think the url should point to the unstable. * I personally think that System Environment/Daemons isn't cery right for ssmtp as it isn't a daemon but only a client. For esmtp I used Applications/Internet, but feel free to chose what you prefer. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 10:11:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 06:11:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188410] Review Request: phpBB In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091011.k39ABG5k012536@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpBB https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188410 ------- Additional Comments From peter at thecodergeek.com 2006-04-09 06:11 EST ------- Hi, Ville. I forgot that the scripts themselves only need be readable in this case. I've uploaded a second release with this fixed, and I also included the cache's .htaccess limits in the global httpd phpBB config file. Source RPM: http://www.thecodergeek.com/downloads/fedora/phpBB-2.0.20-2.src.rpm Spec: http://www.thecodergeek.com/downloads/fedora/phpBB.spec Thanks for your time. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 10:27:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 06:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 169704] Review Request: mosml - Moscow ML In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091027.k39AR9HZ015251@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mosml - Moscow ML https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169704 ------- Additional Comments From gemi at bluewin.ch 2006-04-09 06:26 EST ------- The site is up again now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From paul at city-fan.org Sun Apr 9 11:11:05 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 12:11:05 +0100 Subject: [Bug 166960] Review Request: Fuse-emulator In-Reply-To: <1144575610.3485.28.camel@T7.Linux> References: <200604082051.k38KpxEi009147@www.beta.redhat.com> <1144575610.3485.28.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <1144581066.9865.103.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 10:40 +0100, Paul wrote: > Hi, > > > Summary: Review Request: Fuse-emulator > > It seems that something happened to the owners.list file as there are > quite a few now not in the list which were in the list a week or so > back. I'm not sure about that. Which revision (or date) of the owners.list file had fuse-emulator in it so recently? I recall removing entries for fuse-emulator and fuse-utils in mid-February (rev 1.662) as the packages weren't approved at the time. A "cvs log owners.list" shows only one commit by you since then (rev 1.771), with a rather unhelpful commit message too. Do you always "cvs update owners.list" before looking at or editing it? It's really important to do this. Paul. From thomas at apestaart.org Sun Apr 9 11:01:42 2006 From: thomas at apestaart.org (thomas at apestaart.org) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 13:01:42 +0200 (CEST) Subject: RELEASE: Mach 0.4.9 'China' Message-ID: <20060409110142.8ACF8F0926@otto.amantes> mach allows you to set up clean roots from scratch for any distribution or distribution variation supported. Currently, this is limited to RPM-based distributions. This clean build root can be used for making clean packages, running jailed services, testing builds, or making disk images of clean roots. For more information, see [http://thomas.apestaart.org/projects/mach/] To file bugs, go to [https://apestaart.org/thomas/trac/newticket] -------------- next part -------------- mach - make a chroot - RELEASE NOTES ------------------------------------ Announcing the release of mach 0.4.9 - China. WHAT IS IT ---------- mach allows you to set up clean roots from scratch for any distribution or distribution variation supported. This clean build root can be used to run jailed services, create disk images, or build clean packages. mach can currently set up roots for the following distributions: - Fedora 4, 5 (core, updated, extras, rpm.livna.org, JPackage, FreshRPMS, GStreamer) - Fedora 1, 2, 3 (core, updated, www.fedora.us, rpm.livna.org, JPackage, FreshRPMS, GStreamer) - Red Hat 8.0, 9 (basic, updated, www.fedora.us, rpm.livna.org, JPackage, GStreamer, FreshRPMS) - Red Hat 7.2, 7.3 (basic, updated, FreshRPMS, JPackage) - Red Hat 7.0, 7.1 (basic, updated, FreshRPMS) - SuSE 8.1/8.2/9 - Connectiva - Yellowdog Linux 3.0 (basic, updated, FreshRPMS) - Yellowdog Linux 2.3 (basic, updated, FreshRPMS) - Dave/Dina 0.0/oven/fridge Read the README included in the distribution for a better overview. CHANGES ------- - added DOAP file (Thomas) - added Fedora Core 5 (Thomas) - fix build ordering when building multiple packages (Thomas) - always evaluate spec file inside the root (Thomas) (which may cause problems due to rpmdb incompatibilities) fixes yum's semi-random behaviour on x86_64 (Thomas) - store yum cache data per-dist, shared for flavors (Thomas) - clean up yum metadata for local repositories (Thomas) WHY WOULD YOU USE IT -------------------- mach is helpful: - to create minimal chroot environments to jail services in - to create clean packages for distributions - to catch spec file mistakes, missing buildrequires, and more INFORMATION ----------- mach's homepage is at http://thomas.apestaart.org/projects/mach/ mach is hosted on SourceForge; the project page is http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/mach/ There is a mailing list for development and use of mach. See http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mach-devel QUICKSTART ---------- a) On a Fedora 4 Core system, install the mach rpm from http://thomas.apestaart.org/download/mach b) su - mach c) mach setup base d) mach chroot poke around a bit in the fresh root e) exit f) mach rebuild http://ayo.freshrpms.net/fedora/linux/4/i386/SRPMS.core/vorbis-tools-1.0.1-6.src.rpm If all goes well, you'll get a nice freshly built vorbis-tools package. Now go out, experiment and bug report ! MAILING LIST ------------ A mailing list has been set up for discussion of mach use and development. Check http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mach-devel for information. The list is low-volume. BUGS ---- To file bugs, go to https://apestaart.org/thomas/trac Always state what platform you are running on, if it's a clean install or somehow updated, how I can reproduce the bug, and output of a run of the failed command with -d (debugging). CONTRIBUTORS ------------ Contributors to releases include - Thomas Vander Stichele - Ville Skytt?? - Jeff Pitman - Rudi Chiarito - Matthias Saou From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 11:42:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 07:42:50 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188410] Review Request: phpBB In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091142.k39Bgowl027760@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpBB https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188410 ivazquez at ivazquez.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ivazquez at ivazquez.net ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-04-09 07:42 EST ------- Has this code been audited for security? Personally I don't want Extras supplying a known-bad piece of software in an easy-to-install (and therefore break) form. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 11:48:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 07:48:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185261] Review Request: gnochm - CHM file viewer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091148.k39BmsM4028598@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnochm - CHM file viewer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185261 pertusus at free.fr changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-09 07:48 EST ------- Builds in devel, thanks for the review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Sun Apr 9 12:52:33 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 14:52:33 +0200 Subject: [Bug 166960] Review Request: Fuse-emulator In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 09 Apr 2006 10:40:10 BST." <1144575610.3485.28.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <200604091252.k39Cqebg010235@mx3.redhat.com> paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk said: > It seems that something happened to the owners.list file as there are quite a > few now not in the list which were in the list a week or so back. I just did a quick grep on the archives of cvs-extras-commits, and nowhere does fuse-emulator appear in owners.list updates (neither added, nor removed)... Maybe you forgot to do a "cvs commit"... Cheers, Christian From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 9 13:05:16 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 09:05:16 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060409130516.86D158001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 1 mach-0.4.9-1.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 9 13:08:43 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 09:08:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060409130843.EADB28001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 6 celestia-1.4.1-0.1.fc4 kdemultimedia-extras-3.5.1-7.fc4 lucidlife-0.9-6.fc4 mach-0.4.9-1.fc4 perl-Text-CHM-0.01-1.fc4 pipenightdreams-0.10.0-2.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 9 13:09:22 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 09:09:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060409130922.E88A88001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 6 libnasl-2.2.6-3.fc5 lucidlife-0.9-7.fc5 mach-0.4.9-1.fc5 nessus-core-2.2.6-3.fc5 perl-Text-CHM-0.01-1.fc5 pipenightdreams-0.10.0-2.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 9 13:18:38 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 09:18:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060409131838.DF8F18001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 7 crystal-stacker-1.5-0.pre.2.fc6 gnochm-0.9.7-2.fc6 gnumeric-1.6.2-3.fc6 lucidlife-0.9-8.fc6 mach-0.4.9-1.fc6 xmms-cdread-0.14-10.fc6 xmms-sid-0.8.0-0.2.beta15.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 9 15:05:18 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 15:05:18 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-09 Message-ID: <20060409150518.6653.6027@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch wine-cms 0.9.11-2.fc3.i386 ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: wine-cms - 0.9.11-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: liblcms.so.1 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 9 15:05:24 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 15:05:24 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-09 Message-ID: <20060409150524.6657.37083@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch wine-cms 0.9.11-2.fc4.i386 ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: wine-cms - 0.9.11-2.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: liblcms.so.1 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 9 15:05:38 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 15:05:38 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-09 Message-ID: <20060409150538.6664.19188@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113 package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113()(64bit) package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0()(64bit) libglade gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 9 15:05:31 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 15:05:31 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-09 Message-ID: <20060409150531.6660.5349@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 16:31:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 12:31:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187932] Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091631.k39GVbu7032736@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187932 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-09 12:31 EST ------- I believe you are right about using the included VTK. In that case it is unlikely that the included VTK will become too old, on the contrary it seems to be newer than the released VTK. * it would be nice to have a .desktop file * rpmlint give some ignorable warnings: W: paraview-data no-documentation W: paraview-demos no-documentation rpmlint is also unhappy with the debuginfo package. There are lots of 'objdump failed', that I don't know how to solve, but there are also some errors, because lots of source files have the executable bit set. It could be possible to chmod -x everything ending in .h .c .cxx. Could be done later, however. * I would have chosed BSD-like for the licence, but Distributable is ok too. * I don't know how much the -data and other packages are coupled. But if they are the specific version release should be required, like Requires: %{name}-data = %{version}-%{release} * right name, follow packaging guidelines * don't distribute unowned directory * other items are right NEEDSWORK: there are many man pages distributed in the paraview-mpi package, and some cmake files that I believe shouldn't be packaged, the man pages refer to non existant header files. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 17:02:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 13:02:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188410] Review Request: phpBB In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091702.k39H2UbT004567@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpBB https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188410 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-09 13:02 EST ------- phpBB is pretty well maintained and has undergone quite a bit of scrutiny. Obviously we shouldn't add known-broken packages to Extras, but I don't think it's the submitter's job to do a full security audit on every package. At some point we have to trust upstream to do their job. However, because of its securityh-sensitive status, this is certainly one of those packages that should have a backup maintainer (or two) so that any necessary updates are released as quickly as possible. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From ville.skytta at iki.fi Sun Apr 9 17:31:16 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 20:31:16 +0300 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-05 In-Reply-To: References: <20060405173942.19376.18329@faldor.intranet> <20060405230453.52fb2d99@alkaid.a.lan> <20060405234854.b4773cc3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060407084340.2ed2869b@alkaid.a.lan> <1144430295.2800.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060408091750.7f6db68f@alkaid.a.lan> Message-ID: <1144603876.27927.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sat, 2006-04-08 at 12:21 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>> "AB" == Andreas Bierfert writes: > > AB> Well I don't know don't have any x86_64 boxes with fc3 or fc4 > AB> anymore. I don't think python-lcms or lcms-devel is needed. Could > AB> somebody please test this. If it does not work maybe an easier > AB> solution would be not pushing that wine subpackage... > > I have several FC3 and FC4 x86_64 boxes around; what exactly needs to > be tested? I installed the lcms packages from both i386 and x86_64 > and rpm didn't complain about conflicts. Thanks, good enough for me, I've modified the push scripts to copy lcms over too. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 17:26:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 13:26:42 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188410] Review Request: phpBB In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091726.k39HQg11007447@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpBB https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188410 yaneti at declera.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |yaneti at declera.com ------- Additional Comments From yaneti at declera.com 2006-04-09 13:26 EST ------- To me phpBB is like the sendmail of the php forum thingies (with less features than some of the ofthers). and fedora still ships sendmail... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 17:36:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 13:36:55 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188429] New: Review Request: glib Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188429 Summary: Review Request: glib Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: rdieter at math.unl.edu QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/glib-1.2.10-19.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/glib-1.2.10-19.src.rpm Description: GLib is a handy library of utility functions. This C library is designed to solve some portability problems and provide other useful functionality which most programs require. GLib is used by GDK, GTK+ and many applications. You should install th glib package because many of your applications will depend on this library. Removed from devel/fc6 Core, intended for (fc6 only) Extras. * Thu Apr 06 2006 Rex Dieter 1:1.2.10-19 - cleanup for Extras - -devel: Requires: pkgconfig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 17:40:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 13:40:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188430] New: Review Request: gtk+ Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188430 Summary: Review Request: gtk+ Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: rdieter at math.unl.edu QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/gtk+-1.2.10-51.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/gtk+-1.2.10-51.src.rpm Description: The gtk+ package contains the GIMP ToolKit (GTK+), a library for creating graphical user interfaces for the X Window System. GTK+ was originally written for the GIMP (GNU Image Manipulation Program) image processing program, but is now used by several other programs as well. Removed from devel/fc6 Core, intended for (fc6 only) Extras. %changelog * Sat Apr 08 2006 Rex Dieter Message-ID: <200604091753.k39HrhNG011709@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Tester https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188376 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |tibbs at math.uh.edu OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-09 13:53 EST ------- It looks like the dependencies are backwards on this; it's a requirement for perl-Test-Deep, not the other way around. So I'll just review all of them. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 18:01:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 14:01:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188410] Review Request: phpBB In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091801.k39I1IaH012681@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpBB https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188410 ------- Additional Comments From peter at thecodergeek.com 2006-04-09 14:01 EST ------- Well, even though phpBB does seem to contain many vulnerabilities, upstream is very good about releasing fixes or patches for these; and it is my intent to keep up to date with upstream releases including these security fixes and/or patch it myself if needed. I'd be happy to take on this package with a couple of other maintainers, as needed. (To be honest, I think that's probably a good idea.) Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 18:06:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 14:06:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182463] Review Request: cairomm (C++ bindings for cairo) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091806.k39I631h013237@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cairomm (C++ bindings for cairo) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182463 ------- Additional Comments From rvinyard at cs.nmsu.edu 2006-04-09 14:06 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://miskatonic.cs.nmsu.edu/pub/cairomm.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://miskatonic.cs.nmsu.edu/pub/fedora/5/srpms/cairomm-0.6. 0-1.src.rpm Summary of changes: - New upstream release - Added docs back in by moving them in install and including in devel files Other changes from feedback: * missing "BuildRequires: pkgconfig" - ADDED * cairomm-devel should really "Requires: pkgconfig", because (1) it contains a pkg-config file and (2) the library headers are stored in a path that is unlikely to be found if pkg-config is not used - ADDED to cairomm BuildRequires and cairomm-devel Requires * prefer "make DESTDIR=%{buildroot} install" over %makeinstall, since while the former is de facto standard, the latter is just a hack - CHANGED * AUTHORS %doc file is about libxmlplusplus and points to its home page - UPSTREAM RELEASE fixes this * README %doc file has libxml++ at the top, very confusing, both files should really be corrected - UPSTREAM RELEASE fixes this * Also note that the cairomm-devel package contains more than "headers and static library". ;) The very important *.so symlink is included, too. - CHANGED * As a hint at the bottom: - CHANGED to the latter suggestion... directory style -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 18:22:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 14:22:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187325] Review Request: jaws In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091822.k39IMESU016395@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jaws https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187325 ------- Additional Comments From kyle at yencer.net 2006-04-09 14:22 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: jaws.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://files.yencer.net/pub/fedora/extras/5/SRPMS/jaws-0.6.1-1.fc5.src.rpm Description: A framework and content management system for building dynamic Web sites. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 18:25:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 14:25:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188376] Review Request: perl-Test-Tester In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091825.k39IPSRL017017@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Tester https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188376 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-09 14:25 EST ------- Builds fine in mock (development branch) and rpmlint is silent. Issues: The package says it's under the same license as perl, but then includes the file "ARTISTIC" and makes no mention of the GPL. Odd; upstream should be whacked, but not a blocker. Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible and license text is included in the package. * source files match upstream: 31d58158d2a6cdb7ad9d9fe3e0aed86e Test-Tester-0.103.tar.gz 31d58158d2a6cdb7ad9d9fe3e0aed86e Test-Tester-0.103.tar.gz-srpm * package builds in mock. * BuildRequires are proper. * final provides and requires are sane. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directory it creates. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * %test is present and all tests pass. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. * The package owns %{perl_vendorlib}/Test, which will probably also be owned by any module under the Test:: namespace. However, none of the dependencies create this directory so there is no alternative but for this package to own it. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 18:41:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 14:41:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188432] New: Review Request: crystal-stacker-themes - Themes for the Crystal Stacker game Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188432 Summary: Review Request: crystal-stacker-themes - Themes for the Crystal Stacker game Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/crystal-stacker-themes.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/crystal-stacker-themes-1.0-1.src.rpm Description: 7 new / extra themes for the Crystal Stacker game. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 18:53:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 14:53:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187625] Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091853.k39IrcjD023413@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187625 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-04-09 14:53 EST ------- Almost there. W: ices conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/logrotate.d/ices Also a number of build warnings I don't like, but I wont't consider them blockers. Kick them upstream. Also, I can't help but think that most of the items in %{_datadir}/ices might be better off all being in %doc instead. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 19:33:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 15:33:45 -0400 Subject: [Bug 165689] Review Request: SquidGuard: filter, redirector and access controller plugin for squid In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091933.k39JXjkN029286@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SquidGuard: filter, redirector and access controller plugin for squid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165689 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |REOPENED Resolution|CURRENTRELEASE | OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163776 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-04-09 15:33 EST ------- The changes requested by Eric Harrison on September 14th, 2005 were never done. The package built in FE5 has been done in error. This package has never been approved. I am removing the package from FE5 because it will cause upgrade problems for K12LTSP. REOPENING Oliver has given up on this package, so we need a new owner. K12LTSP is now working on officially merging with the Fedora Project, so hopefully we will figure something out for this package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 19:41:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 15:41:01 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188430] Review Request: gtk+ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091941.k39Jf14o030444@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gtk+ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188430 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- BugsThisDependsOn| |188429 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-04-09 15:40 EST ------- Please add any dependencies here so it is clear which order we need to approve and build things. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 19:44:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 15:44:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188410] Review Request: phpBB In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091944.k39JiUXf030932@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpBB https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188410 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |wtogami at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-04-09 15:44 EST ------- > Secondly, it complains that there is an htaccess file in the distribution: > E: phpBB htaccess-file /var/www/phpBB2/cache/.htaccess > This is where phpBB stores it cache data, and this .htaccess file explicitly > disallows any direct requests for those files. Thus, this seems reasonable > ignore, also. By default httpd.conf doesn't allow htaccess overrides, so the effectiveness of this .htaccess is not great. I am pretty sure this directory doesn't need to be in a web accessible directory at all. You could patch the default directory so that it uses someplace like /var/cache/phpbb instead (not sure, I haven't tested this)? About PHPBB security, it is actively maintained, but has a long history of repeated security holes. I've seen many Linux servers become compromised by script kiddies due to past PHPBB holes. If PHPBB gets into Fedora, the maintainer(s) *MUST* be vigilant in updating the package quickly when upstream makes a new release. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 19:47:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 15:47:19 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188205] Review Request: pessulus-0.9 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604091947.k39JlJXU031313@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pessulus-0.9 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188205 bdpepple at ameritech.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |177841 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-04-09 15:47 EST ------- Spot, this is the first package for this submitter. Based on all the changes you made to fix this spec file, I'm a little leery of having him sponsored based on this package. He should probably submit a few more packages, so we can assess his knowledge before sponsoring him. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 20:00:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 16:00:08 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188410] Review Request: phpBB In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604092000.k39K08p7032671@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpBB https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188410 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-04-09 16:00 EST ------- Another option would be to put those explicit disallows into a /etc/httpd/conf.d/phpbb.conf, although I am not sure if this is a better or worse idea than my last comment. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 20:02:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 16:02:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187625] Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604092002.k39K2kwH000533@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187625 ------- Additional Comments From rjune at bravegnuworld.com 2006-04-09 16:02 EST ------- Fixed the conffile without noreplace flag ices-2.0.1-4.src.rpm: http://home.bravegnuworld.com/~rjune/rpm/SRPMS/ices-2.0.1-4.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 22:45:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 18:45:47 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188435] New: Review Request: glibrary-1.0.1 Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188435 Summary: Review Request: glibrary-1.0.1 Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: splinux at fedoraproject.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/glibrary/glibrary.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/glibrary/glibrary-1.0.1-1.fc6.src.rpm Description: GLibrary is small, but useful book manager based on GTK+ and SQLite database engine. It can store base informations like: author, genere, publisher, translators and many others. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 23:09:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 19:09:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188205] Review Request: pessulus-0.9 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604092309.k39N9nIj024582@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pessulus-0.9 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188205 ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-04-09 19:09 EST ------- Damien, do you have another package we can look at before I sponsor you? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 23:16:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 19:16:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175631] Review Request: fedora-package-config-smart - Configuration files for the smart package manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604092316.k39NGSfN025231@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fedora-package-config-smart - Configuration files for the smart package manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175631 tcallawa at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|Jochen at herr-schmitt.de |tcallawa at redhat.com OtherBugsDependingO| |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-04-09 19:16 EST ------- Review: - rpmlint checks return: E: fedora-package-config-smart no-binary W: fedora-package-config-smart no-documentation Both are safe to ignore. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPL) OK - spec file legible, in am. english - no real way to check config files against "upstream" - package compiles on devel (x86) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - content ok - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc - no need for .desktop file APPROVED. One down, one to go. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 23:22:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 19:22:50 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188090] Review Request: gpsd In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604092322.k39NMojL025934@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gpsd https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188090 kevin at tummy.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |kevin at tummy.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-04-09 19:22 EST ------- A review: See Below - Rpmlint output. OK - Package name. OK - Spec file name matches. OK - Package guidelines. OK - Licsense. (BSD) OK - License field matches in spec. OK - License included in files OK - Spec in american english OK - Spec legible See below- Md5sum of source from upstream OK - Compiles and builds on one arch at least. See below - All required buildrequires included? OK - Ldconfig in post/postun if including libs. OK - Owns all directories it creates. OK - No duplicate files in %files listing. OK - Permissions on files correct. OK - Clean section correct. OK - Macros consistant. OK - Code not content. OK - Header files/libs in a devel package. OK - .so files in devel package. OK - Devel package requires base package. OK - No .la files. OK - .desktop file if a GUI app OK - Doesn't own any files/dirs that are already owned by others. Items needing attention: 1. md5sum's of the upstream source don't seem to match: 4bb9b0c1642d36265c807a04da3d6f60 gpsd-2.32.tar.gz 8212ac4b10deb3f69d84b80a8a0d3cfd gpsd-2.32.tar.gz.1 2. Are you only planning for this to be in devel? You might consider using a dist tag... http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag For fc4 you would also have to change the X BuildRequires. 3. Consider supressing /usr/lib/libgps.a file with --disable-static or removing the .a file before packaging. 4. The 'E: gpsd-clients only-non-binary-in-usr-lib' rpmlint can probibly be ignored. It's good to ship app-defaults files so people can customize as they like. perhaps file an RFE against rpmlint to allow this case? 5. I see in the build logs: xmlto man gps.xml make[1]: xmlto: Command not found make[1]: [gps.1] Error 127 (ignored) Perhaps a 'BuildRequires: xmlto' is needed? 6. You use a python call to determine the python site dir, should you also have a 'BuildRequires: python'? It's not in the exceptions list of packages not to list. (Althought it's in the base build group, so it works) 7. There is also a 'W: gpsd non-conffile-in-etc /etc/hotplug/usb/gpsd.usermap' from rpmlint. I think thats safe to ignore as well. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 23:26:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 19:26:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 183439] Review Request: papyrus (Canvas drawing library based on cairo/cairomm) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604092326.k39NQkqe026407@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: papyrus (Canvas drawing library based on cairo/cairomm) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183439 ------- Additional Comments From rvinyard at cs.nmsu.edu 2006-04-09 19:26 EST ------- New release and changes reflecting cairomm 0.6.0. Spec Name or Url: http://miskatonic.cs.nmsu.edu/pub/papyrus.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://miskatonic.cs.nmsu.edu/pub/fedora/5/srpms/papyrus-0.1.10-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 23:50:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 19:50:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188432] Review Request: crystal-stacker-themes - Themes for the Crystal Stacker game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604092350.k39NoHes029872@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: crystal-stacker-themes - Themes for the Crystal Stacker game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188432 wart at kobold.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |wart at kobold.org OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-09 19:50 EST ------- This one was pretty straightforward... MUST ==== * rpmlint output clean * spec file named appropriately * source matches upstream de59b772b4683cd09b2302c1fa638b46 csdream.zip 5273a28db94d61eedfa3c0bf65c2f107 csfood.zip a7534dec94cd5d141c77df4ea5a6d19d csgems.zip f84b75c649eb1c2c88cc90fa2d4b1c99 cslcd.zip bac5ea214401a9dcbb1ffb8ef390702c csmatrix.zip 27fdacb7b28336547b1c7eee5fcdc06a csoldcs.zip 9ea8e39a439c927f7bb29046a6639ba2 csstone.zip * License (freeware) ok, license file included, license clarification discussion included and ok. * No excessive BR: * Compiles, builds, and runs on FC-5 i386 * No locales * Not relocatable * No shared libraries * No -devel package * No libtool archives * No .desktop file necessary * Does not create any directories that it should own * Contains acceptable game content APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 23:51:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 19:51:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175630] Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604092351.k39NpumQ030115@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175630 tcallawa at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |tcallawa at redhat.com OtherBugsDependingO| |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-04-09 19:51 EST ------- One minor issue that I see immediately: smart should have Requires: fedora-package-config-smart Review: - rpmlint checks return: W: smart-update no-documentation (ok to ignore) W: smart-gui conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/pam.d/smart-root W: smart-gui conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/security/console.apps/smart-root (ok to ignore, there should be no need for the user to edit these files) W: smart-gui no-documentation (ok to ignore) - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPL) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - locales handled properly - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - .desktop file ok Minor issues: - There is one reference to /usr/bin , please replace with %{_bindir} Major Issue: - gui mode doesn't work with the included distro.py. You need to make the following change: --- distro.py.orig 2006-04-09 18:56:29.000000000 -0500 +++ distro.py 2006-04-09 18:56:48.000000000 -0500 @@ -6,9 +6,9 @@ "name": "RPM Database"}) for flavour in ("", "-smp", "-hugemem", "-largesmp", "-xen0", "-xenU", "-kdump"): - pkgconf.setFlag("multi-version", "kernel%s" flavour) - pkgconf.setFlag("multi-version", "kernel%s-unsupported" flavour) - pkgconf.setFlag("multi-version", "kernel%s-devel" flavour) + pkgconf.setFlag("multi-version", "kernel%s" % (flavour)) + pkgconf.setFlag("multi-version", "kernel%s-unsupported" % (flavour)) + pkgconf.setFlag("multi-version", "kernel%s-devel" % (flavour)) for clustergfs in ("GFS", "cman", "dlm", "gnbd"): pkgconf.setFlag("multi-version", "%s-kernel%s" % (clustergfs, flavour)) ... otherwise, it gets confused in trying to call setFlag, this resolves it. Show me a package that has all of these items resolved, and I will approve it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 23:53:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 19:53:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177276] Review Request: perl-DBD-AnyData : DBI access to XML, CSV and other formats In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604092353.k39NrT81030345@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-DBD-AnyData : DBI access to XML, CSV and other formats https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177276 tcallawa at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-04-09 19:53 EST ------- Built in repo. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 9 23:54:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 19:54:01 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177277] Review Request: perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit : Portable LIMIT Emulation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604092354.k39Ns1s3030416@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit : Portable LIMIT Emulation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177277 Bug 177277 depends on bug 177276, which changed state. Bug 177276 Summary: Review Request: perl-DBD-AnyData : DBI access to XML, CSV and other formats https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177276 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 00:15:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 20:15:48 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177277] Review Request: perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit : Portable LIMIT Emulation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100015.k3A0FmgK000499@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit : Portable LIMIT Emulation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177277 tcallawa at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-04-09 20:15 EST ------- Built in repo. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 00:43:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 20:43:44 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188378] Review Request: perl-Test-NoWarnings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100043.k3A0hi3h004628@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-NoWarnings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188378 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-09 20:43 EST ------- Builds fine in mock (development branch, with dependencies added) and rpmlint is silent. Issues: For grammar's sake, s/modules/module/ in the description. Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. Text of license is included in the package. * source files match upstream: 702143eab77ffc335a08beccac47dca4 Test-NoWarnings-0.082.tar.gz 702143eab77ffc335a08beccac47dca4 Test-NoWarnings-0.082.tar.gz-srpm * package builds in mock. * BuildRequires are proper. * final provides and requires are sane. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directories it creates. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * %check is present and all tests pass. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. * The package owns %{perl_vendorlib}/Test, which is also owned by other modules in the Test:: namespace. No dependency owns this directory, however, so there's no alternative. APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 00:45:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 20:45:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188440] New: Review Request: dispatcher Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188440 Summary: Review Request: dispatcher Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: splinux at fedoraproject.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/dispatcher/dispatcher.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/dispatcher/dispatcher-0.4.6-1.fc6.src.rpm Description: Dispatcher is a short time scheduler simulator. It was implemented for Operating Systems examination at Naples University Federico II. Fcfs, round robin, virtula round robin and priority schedulers are now available. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 01:05:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 21:05:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100105.k3A15nZe007165@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ssmtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 ------- Additional Comments From wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro 2006-04-09 21:05 EST ------- Thank for the helpful comments, Patrice ! Yes, I will need a sponsor, but I've thought I could ask for one when the package gets in a neater shape. I did consider not including smtpdaemon in provides, but this is a tough decision and I would definitely like to hear a second opinion. The problemn is that there are packages in Base (such as mdadm) which claim that they require smtpdaemon, although they make either direct use of /usr/sbin/sendmail or via the mail command. In my case I was interested exactly by the fact that I do NOT want/need to have a daemon listening on port 25. Same goes for MTA. Without the alternatives --auto call, a default mta would not be restored if the package is removed, this is why I think that the script should be kept. The reasons I have placed ssmtp in /usr/sbin are that both sendmail and postfix place the sendmail binary in /usr/sbin and so does the Debian provided ssmtp, too. Since applications actually look after /usr/sbin/sendmail which is a symlink (via alternatives mta) to the real binaries, I guess I could move ssmtp to /usr/bin. However I kind of think that maintaining the placement as chosen by the authors of the program is a good idea. New spec and src.rpm are available at http://wdl.lug.ro/linux/ssmtp/ssmtp.spec and http://wdl.lug.ro/linux/ssmtp/ssmtp-2.61-2.src.rpm , respectively. The old spec has been renamed to ssmtp.v1.spec, in case anyone whishes to compare the versions. Major changes: (hopefully) fixed a bug in the pre/post scriptlets; as suggested, dropped the double ssmtp in the files' name and the [ %{buildroot} != "/" ] test; completely removed the generate_config_alt script (I have found a bug in it and I intend to provide another script, given the time to write it; the provied ssmtp.conf file only needs 3-4 lines to be edited so I hope it's not a major burden); changed the group to Applications/Internet; renamed the patch; added openssl/openssl-devel to requires/buildrequires. Other minor changes are listed in the Changelog. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 01:07:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 21:07:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187569] Review Request: xfce4-mailwatch-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100107.k3A17dWL007442@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xfce4-mailwatch-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187569 kevin at tummy.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |kevin at tummy.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-04-09 21:07 EST ------- A review: OK - Rpmlint output. OK - Package name. OK - Spec file name matches. OK - Package guidelines. OK - Licsense. (GPL) OK - License field matches in spec. OK - License included in files OK - Spec in american english OK - Spec legible OK - Md5sum of source from upstream e31d32b08f82e24e730831641cdd65f0 xfce4-mailwatch-plugin-1.0.0.tar.bz2 e31d32b08f82e24e730831641cdd65f0 xfce4-mailwatch-plugin-1.0.0.tar.bz2.1 OK - Compiles and builds on one arch at least. See below - All required buildrequires included? OK - Locale handling/find_lang. OK - Owns all directories it creates. OK - No duplicate files in %files listing. OK - Permissions on files correct. OK - Clean section correct. OK - Macros consistant. OK - Code not content. OK - No .la files. See Below - Doesn't own any files/dirs that are already owned by others. Items needing attention: 1. The summary has "Summary: Quicklauncher plugin for the Xfce panel" Shouldn't that be "Mail Watcher plugin for the Xfce panel"? 2. Some of the dirs that this package owns are owned by lots of other packages. In particular: /usr/share/icons/hicolor /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps /usr/share/xfce4/doc/C /usr/share/xfce4/doc/C/images This package shouldn't also need to own those I wouldn't think. Perhaps require hicolor-icon-theme and xfce4-panel to make sure those dir dependencies are met. 3. Doesn't build in mock. Looks like it might be missing: BuildRequires: imake libXt-devel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 01:25:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 21:25:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185721] Review Request: yadex - Doom level/wad editor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100125.k3A1Px1p009748@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: yadex - Doom level/wad editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185721 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-09 21:25 EST ------- User error. I was trying to use the mouse in the "view texture" mode, when it seems that it only responds to up/down arrow. The sprite and texture viewers don't seem to properly refresh the display on Expose events, but it's not a critical problem. Right now I'm trying to figure out why it fails to build in mock but not on my desktop. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 01:56:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 21:56:04 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188410] Review Request: phpBB In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100156.k3A1u4XT014054@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpBB https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188410 ------- Additional Comments From peter at thecodergeek.com 2006-04-09 21:56 EST ------- (In reply to comment #8) > Another option would be to put those explicit disallows into a > /etc/httpd/conf.d/phpbb.conf, although I am not sure if this is a better or > worse idea than my last comment. That's one thing I changed in release 2. :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 02:35:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 22:35:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188410] Review Request: phpBB In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100235.k3A2ZOP4021589@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: phpBB https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188410 peter at thecodergeek.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX ------- Additional Comments From peter at thecodergeek.com 2006-04-09 22:35 EST ------- Actually, I've been discussing this with a couple of my friends and based on phpBB's track record of vulnerabilities, it may be for the best *not* to package it in Extras until it can be properly audited and whatnot. I'll close this as WONTFIX. Have a nice evening, all. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 03:09:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 23:09:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188380] Review Request: perl-Test-Deep In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100309.k3A39cH9029656@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Deep https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188380 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-09 23:09 EST ------- The package builds in mock (development branch, with dependencies added) and rpmlint is silent. Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: b47659e09457a72157d3db5b5be62f75 Test-Deep-0.093.tar.gz b47659e09457a72157d3db5b5be62f75 Test-Deep-0.093.tar.gz-srpm * package builds in mock. * BuildRequires are proper. * final provides and requires are sane. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directories it creates. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * %check is present and all tests pass. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. * The package owns %{perl_vendorlib}/Test, which will probably also be owned by any module under the Test:: namespace. However, none of the dependencies create this directory so there is no alternative. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 03:20:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 23:20:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181444] Review Request: lcov -- process gcov output into nice html pages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100320.k3A3KG8h030814@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lcov -- process gcov output into nice html pages https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181444 ------- Additional Comments From roland at redhat.com 2006-04-09 23:20 EST ------- I added it to owners.list; I don't know if any more magic is required. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 03:53:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 23:53:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188445] New: Review Request: bootconf Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188445 Summary: Review Request: bootconf Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: mrsam at courier-mta.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com SRPM Name or Url: http://www.courier-mta.com/bootconf-1.0-1.src.rpm Description: bootconf is a utility that sets several common Linux kernel boot options. bootconf parses grub.conf, and adds or subtracts keywords from the kernel boot line, as appropriate. bootconf can be used either in Gnome, with a GUI window, or a text-only command line. A manual page is provided. A Gnome menu link is provided: System Tools -> Boot Configuration -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 04:10:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 00:10:34 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181445] Review Request: php-shout In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100410.k3A4AYCI006345@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-shout https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181445 ------- Additional Comments From holbrookbw at users.sourceforge.net 2006-04-10 00:10 EST ------- http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/phpshout/php-shout.spec?download http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/phpshout/php-shout-0.3a-5.src.rpm?download Sorry for the delay, my research took me on a trip to San Antonio so I was unable to work on this for a while. Here are my newest files, the 'install -D' issues have been completely cleared up. I have not added a php fallback version dependency, but as sponsor Matthias is in charge, so tell me if you see this as a showstopper. Also of note, the 'php-api' virtual dependency suggested by Dmitry works great for FC5 and Devel, but FC3 and FC4 don't have that virtual, so installation of the RPM fails with a missing depency. I have included the php-api dependency in the currently submitted .spec file, but the .spec will have to revert to PHP versioning in the FE[34] branches of CVS. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 05:11:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 01:11:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188090] Review Request: gpsd In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100511.k3A5BWhC014952@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gpsd https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188090 ------- Additional Comments From matt at truch.net 2006-04-10 01:11 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > Items needing attention: > > 1. md5sum's of the upstream source don't seem to match: > > 4bb9b0c1642d36265c807a04da3d6f60 gpsd-2.32.tar.gz > 8212ac4b10deb3f69d84b80a8a0d3cfd gpsd-2.32.tar.gz.1 This is weird. I get that they do: 4bb9b0c1642d36265c807a04da3d6f60 gpsd-2.32.tar.gz 4bb9b0c1642d36265c807a04da3d6f60 gpsd-2.32.tar.gz.1 Ohhh, maybe I accidentally used the source from the upstream srpm the first time around (and perhaps that source tarball doesn't match). Weird. > 2. Are you only planning for this to be in devel? > You might consider using a dist tag... > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag I know, and included the dist tag shortly after I submitted this bug report (but didn't yet post the new srpm as it was the only change). I use it in the new srpm as indicated below. > For fc4 you would also have to change the X BuildRequires. Right. Will do if I build for fc4 (as right now I'm not even sure what is needed). > 3. Consider supressing /usr/lib/libgps.a file with > --disable-static or removing the .a file before packaging. Done. > 4. The 'E: gpsd-clients only-non-binary-in-usr-lib' rpmlint > can probibly be ignored. It's good to ship app-defaults files > so people can customize as they like. perhaps file an RFE > against rpmlint to allow this case? Ok, ignoring error. > 5. I see in the build logs: > xmlto man gps.xml > make[1]: xmlto: Command not found > make[1]: [gps.1] Error 127 (ignored) > > Perhaps a 'BuildRequires: xmlto' is needed? Oops. My bad. Fixed. > 6. You use a python call to determine the python site dir, > should you also have a 'BuildRequires: python'? It's not in the > exceptions list of packages not to list. (Althought it's in > the base build group, so it works) Also fixed. > 7. There is also a 'W: gpsd non-conffile-in-etc /etc/hotplug/usb/gpsd.usermap' > from rpmlint. I think thats safe to ignore as well. Also ignoring. New spec and srpm: http://matt.truch.net/fedora/gpsd.spec http://matt.truch.net/fedora/gpsd-2.32-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 06:22:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 02:22:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188432] Review Request: crystal-stacker-themes - Themes for the Crystal Stacker game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100622.k3A6Mdvx024357@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: crystal-stacker-themes - Themes for the Crystal Stacker game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188432 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-10 02:22 EST ------- Thanks! imported & build. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 06:25:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 02:25:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185721] Review Request: yadex - Doom level/wad editor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100625.k3A6Pkwv024805@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: yadex - Doom level/wad editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185721 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-10 02:25 EST ------- It was a local mock configuration error. Everything should be good now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Mon Apr 10 06:56:46 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 08:56:46 +0200 Subject: What todo with upstream content in .noarch.rpm format? Message-ID: <443A01AE.5090302@hhs.nl> Hi, I'm seriously thinking (actually time is the biggest problem) thinking about packaging gcompris: http://gcompris.net/ This use assetml, which comes with a lot of data file with sounds for this (educational) software we have great sounds like "a" in many languages. Upstream distributes these soundpacks in .noarch.rpm format, and they are pretty clean rpms (just a bunch of files under /usr/share/assetml) so they could be dropped straight in our repo. However we don't have any facilities for doing that so I tend to still create a spec file which will "rebuild" them, so that would be rpm2cpio, extract, re-rpm I guess any better ideas? Thanks & Regards, Hans From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 07:47:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 03:47:15 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100747.k3A7lFhG008197@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ssmtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-10 03:47 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > Thank for the helpful comments, Patrice ! > Yes, I will need a sponsor, but I've thought I could ask for one when the > package gets in a neater shape. In my opinion you should start to find one sooner than later... I think a sponsor not only look at the shape of your package, but also your willing to accept the fedora extra rules and to learn from others... > I did consider not including smtpdaemon in provides, but this is a tough > decision and I would definitely like to hear a second opinion. The problemn is > that there are packages in Base (such as mdadm) which claim that they require > smtpdaemon, although they make either direct use of /usr/sbin/sendmail or via > the mail command. In my case I was interested exactly by the fact that I do NOT > want/need to have a daemon listening on port 25. Same goes for MTA. It seems to me a mdadm bug. smtpdaemon should be required in case there is a need for a daemon listening on port 25. It seems very wrong to me to provide smtpdaemon when it is untrue, the packages that requires a smtp daemon would fail. > Without the alternatives --auto call, a default mta would not be restored if the > package is removed, this is why I think that the script should be kept. No, after alternatives --remove, if the current alternative was the alternative removed, it is set to the auto. However if the current alternative wasn't the auto nor the removed alternative, the alternative is changed to the auto, this is very bad! > The reasons I have placed ssmtp in /usr/sbin are that both sendmail and postfix > place the sendmail binary in /usr/sbin and so does the Debian provided ssmtp, > too. Since applications actually look after /usr/sbin/sendmail which is a > symlink (via alternatives mta) to the real binaries, I guess I could move ssmtp > to /usr/bin. However I kind of think that maintaining the placement as chosen by > the authors of the program is a good idea. Ok, I had a wrong loook at Makefile.in. I think it is a mistake, as ssmtp could be used by users even if it isn't set up as a sendmail replacement. esmtp and msmtp (which compares more to ssmtp than sendmail and postfix, because they don't need to be run as root) are installed in bindir. To me it looks like an upstream error. But feel free to do what you prefer. > added openssl/openssl-devel to requires/buildrequires. Other minor changes are > listed in the Changelog. The Requires openssl isn't needed, it should be picked up automatically by rpm. In the changelog there are typos on the version. %dir %{_sysconfdir}/ssmtp/ would be better than %{_sysconfdir}/ssmtp/ because the latter means the directory and what it contains, but what it contains is allready listed separately. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 09:10:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 05:10:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188458] New: Review Request: libasset-ml - xml resource database library Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188458 Summary: Review Request: libasset-ml - xml resource database library Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: Sorry no URL I'm currently behind a PC which doesn't have upload access to my homepage :| I'll attach the specfile instead. SRPM Name or Url: Same here, just download the tar bal from the sf.net homepage, thats all you need besides the spec. Description: AssetML defines an xml file that can be used by application developers as a resource database. The idea is to have a way to search content on your hard drive with metadata (like name, category, file type, description) instead of just a file name. This way, users can browse content more easily and developers can share content more easily. --- This is one of the dependencies of gcompris (http://gcompris.net/), which in turn is a big collection of educational games I would really like to package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 09:15:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 05:15:41 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185721] Review Request: yadex - Doom level/wad editor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100915.k3A9FfOv027120@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: yadex - Doom level/wad editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185721 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-10 05:15 EST ------- Ok, I'll try to todo a full review soon then. Unfortunatly I _really_ should start doing some stuff for my work right now. I know I just submitted a package for review myself, thats because a Dutch language pack was recently released for an educational game, so no my little one can play it once packaged. Thus I couldn't help myself :) I'll also take a look at the bsd-games setgid stuff when I find the time. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 09:28:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 05:28:51 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175630] Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100928.k3A9SpHr029734@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175630 Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL|http://people.atrpms.net/~at|http://people.atrpms.net/~at |himm/fedorasubmit/smart- |himm/fedorasubmit/smart- |0.41-28.src.rpm |0.41-29.src.rpm ------- Additional Comments From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net 2006-04-10 05:28 EST ------- The new package at http://people.atrpms.net/~athimm/fedorasubmit/smart-0.41-29.src.rpm fixes the three issues from comment #10: * Mon Apr 10 2006 Axel Thimm - 0.41-29 - Fix typos in distro.py, there were %% missing. - /usr/bin/smart-root should had been %%{_bindir}/smart-root ... - Make dependent on fedora-package-config-smart. I hadn't added the dependency to fedora-package-config-smart on purpose, because this package should be replaceable by local policies (e.g. local mirrors), and because Fedora Core's main depsolver, yum, also doesn't have a dependency on its repo files. But I see the benefits, too (yum install smart does the expected operation, no surprised users and bug reports). Thanks for reviewing! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 09:50:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 05:50:47 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188461] New: Review Request: xmms-musepack - Mpegplus (mpc) playback plugin for XMMS Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188461 Summary: Review Request: xmms-musepack - Mpegplus (mpc) playback plugin for XMMS Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: matthias at rpmforge.net QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://svn.rpmforge.net/svn/trunk/rpms/xmms-musepack/ SRPM Name or Url: http://freshrpms.net/rpm/xmms-musepack Description: X MultiMedia System input plugin to play mpegplus, aka mpc files. Now that libmpcdec has been included into Extras, this plugin can be too. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 09:55:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 05:55:15 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185721] Review Request: yadex - Doom level/wad editor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604100955.k3A9tFYH002386@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: yadex - Doom level/wad editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185721 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-10 05:55 EST ------- I just saw I already started a full review, so its easy to finish it here we go again: MUST ==== * rpmlint output OK: E: yadex configure-without-libdir-spec W: yadex patch-not-applied Patch1: http://glbsp.sourceforge.net/yadex/Yadex_170_Hexen.diff Which are both ok, for the patch warning see the comment in the spec file, the other is no problem since there are no files installed to %{_libdir} and there is a good reason to not use %configure (see comment in spec) * Package named correctly * GPL license OK. * spec file legible, in Am. English * Source matches upstream * Successfully compiles and builds on at least one platform (devel x86_64 & i386) * no locale data, shared libraries, or static libraries * No excessive Requires: or BR: * Summary and description ok * macro use consistent * package owns the directories that it creates. * Not relocatable * %doc does not affect runtime Approved! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 10:02:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 06:02:08 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188293] Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101002.k3AA28Kf003657@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188293 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-04-10 06:01 EST ------- Please add additional buildreqs: perl(HTML::TreeBuilder) perl(Test::Pod) perl(Test::Pod::Coverage) All are available in Extras and will provide additional test coverage. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 10:12:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 06:12:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188261] Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101012.k3AAC3bp005562@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188261 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |paul at city-fan.org BugsThisDependsOn| |188293 OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-04-10 06:11 EST ------- Please bump the release number for package revisions during the review phase - it helps make clear which comments relate to which version of the package. I'm unable to extract the current SRPM: perl-Finance-Quote-1.11-1/cpio: premature end of file The file I have is 89583 bytes, so I appear to have all of what's on the server. Please ensure that perl(HTML::TableExtract) is a buildreq for this package if you haven't already done so. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 10:14:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 06:14:10 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188462] New: Review Request: bmp-musepack - Mpegplus (mpc) playback plugin for BMP Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188462 Summary: Review Request: bmp-musepack - Mpegplus (mpc) playback plugin for BMP Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: matthias at rpmforge.net QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://svn.rpmforge.net/svn/trunk/rpms/bmp-musepack/ SRPM Name or Url: http://freshrpms.net/rpm/bmp-musepack Description: This package contains an MPC playback plugin for BMP (Beep Media Player), a media player that uses a skinned user interface based on Winamp 2.x skins, and is based on ("forked off") XMMS. Now that libmpcdec has been included into Extras, this plugin can be too. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 10:23:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 06:23:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188205] Review Request: pessulus-0.9 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101023.k3AANbIU008256@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pessulus-0.9 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188205 ------- Additional Comments From splinux at fedoraproject.org 2006-04-10 06:23 EST ------- Hi Tom, you can check these packages : - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188435 - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188440 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From paul at city-fan.org Mon Apr 10 10:46:13 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:46:13 +0100 Subject: owners owners.list,1.823,1.824 In-Reply-To: <200604101035.k3AAZFVm023835@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200604101035.k3AAZFVm023835@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <443A3775.9000206@city-fan.org> Paul F. Johnson (pfj) wrote: > Author: pfj > > Update of /cvs/extras/owners > In directory cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv23818 > > Modified Files: > owners.list > Log Message: > > owners.list > > > > Index: owners.list > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/extras/owners/owners.list,v > retrieving revision 1.823 > retrieving revision 1.824 > diff -u -r1.823 -r1.824 > --- owners.list 10 Apr 2006 06:43:36 -0000 1.823 > +++ owners.list 10 Apr 2006 10:35:13 -0000 1.824 > @@ -284,6 +284,7 @@ > Fedora Extras|fuse|File System in Userspace|lemenkov at newmail.ru|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > Fedora Extras|fuse-encfs|Encrypted pass-thru filesystem in userspace|lemenkov at newmail.ru|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > Fedora Extras|fuse-sshfs|FUSE-Filesystem to access remote filesystems via SSH|lemenkov at newmail.ru|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > +Fedora Extras|fuse-emulator|A Sinclair ZX Spectrum emulator|paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > Fedora Extras|fwbuilder|Firewall Builder|redhat-bugzilla at camperquake.de|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > Fedora Extras|fwrestart|A way to more safely re-load firewall rules remotely|kevin-redhat-bugzilla at tummy.com|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > Fedora Extras|fyre|A tool for creating artwork from chaotic functions|ivazquez at ivazquez.net|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > @@ -470,6 +471,7 @@ > Fedora Extras|ifplugd|Detect and take action when an ethernet cable is unplugged|aaron.bennett at olin.edu|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > Fedora Extras|iftop|Command line tool that displays bandwidth usage on an interface|gauret at free.fr|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > Fedora Extras|iiimf-le-simplehangul|Romanized Korean Hangul language engine for IIIMF|wtogami at redhat.com|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > +Fedora Extras|ikvm|A Java compatibility layer for Mono|paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > Fedora Extras|imlib2|A graphic library for file loading, saving, rendering, and manipulation|anvil at livna.org|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > Fedora Extras|inadyn|A Dynamic DNS Client|Jochen at herr-schmitt.de|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > Fedora Extras|inkscape|A vector-based drawing program using SVG|denis at poolshark.org|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| A log message of "owners.list" is rather redundant. Why not use something like: Add fuse-emulator and ikvm next time you update it? "cvs log owners.list" shows that most people use useful commit log messages. Paul. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Mon Apr 10 10:54:22 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:54:22 +0100 Subject: owners owners.list,1.823,1.824 In-Reply-To: <443A3775.9000206@city-fan.org> References: <200604101035.k3AAZFVm023835@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <443A3775.9000206@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <1144666462.20705.7.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, > A log message of "owners.list" is rather redundant. > Why not use something like: > > Add fuse-emulator and ikvm > > next time you update it? "cvs log owners.list" shows that most people > use useful commit log messages. Will do. You'll find something similar as I've just updated for gdeskcal. I'm having fun trying to get gonvert to work once it's built, so that hasn't been adopted yet. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 10:57:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 06:57:41 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101057.k3AAvfxe015836@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 ------- Additional Comments From frank-buettner at gmx.net 2006-04-10 06:57 EST ------- This is my first package and I need an sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From rdieter at math.unl.edu Mon Apr 10 11:18:18 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 06:18:18 -0500 Subject: What todo with upstream content in .noarch.rpm format? In-Reply-To: <443A01AE.5090302@hhs.nl> References: <443A01AE.5090302@hhs.nl> Message-ID: Hans de Goede wrote: > I'm seriously thinking (actually time is the biggest problem) thinking > about packaging gcompris: > http://gcompris.net/ > > This use assetml, which comes with a lot of data file with sounds for > this (educational) software we have great sounds like "a" in many > languages. Upstream distributes these soundpacks in .noarch.rpm format, > and they are pretty clean rpms (just a bunch of files under > /usr/share/assetml) so they could be dropped straight in our repo. > > However we don't have any facilities for doing that Extras certainly has the ability to build .noarch pkgs. If you meant to imply these upstream rpms should forego the usual cvs import and buildsystem, then no, can't/shouldn't be done. -- Rex From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Mon Apr 10 11:33:15 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 12:33:15 +0100 Subject: gonvert added to extras Message-ID: <1144668795.20705.11.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, I've updated gonvert for FE and FC-5 extras. My buildsys is at home and for some reason, the connection from work to there has failed, so I've not updated the owners.list file, but have removed it from the wiki page. Once I get home I'll update the owners.list (probably about 18.30 British Summer Time) to reflect this. Both gonvert and gdeskcal should both be in the next extras push. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From lists at timj.co.uk Mon Apr 10 11:59:52 2006 From: lists at timj.co.uk (Tim Jackson) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 12:59:52 +0100 Subject: What todo with upstream content in .noarch.rpm format? In-Reply-To: <443A01AE.5090302@hhs.nl> References: <443A01AE.5090302@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <443A48B8.4070209@timj.co.uk> Hans de Goede wrote: > http://gcompris.net/ > This use assetml, which comes with a lot of data file with sounds for > this (educational) software we have great sounds like "a" in many > languages. Upstream distributes these soundpacks in .noarch.rpm format, They must be building the RPMs from sources of some kind. Don't they distribute tarballs or the sources at all? Might you be able to encourage them to do so? > create a spec file which will "rebuild" them, so that would be > rpm2cpio, extract, re-rpm I guess any better ideas? Sounds like the way to go if they won't distribute the "real" sources. It's not unreasonable though it could easily get confusing :) Tim From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 11:56:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 07:56:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187351] Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101156.k3ABuPLh027048@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187351 ------- Additional Comments From matthias at rpmforge.net 2006-04-10 07:56 EST ------- Yeah, there are definitely issues with file adding, like playlist icons not working, while right click is, or errors and playback stop when .jpg files are found... The program is still maturing, working "enough" for many people, and could possibly benefit from a wider testing if it was available in Extras, so this should be a review about the package more than about the bugs remaining in the software... which should go here : http://bugs.beep-media-player.org/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 12:09:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 08:09:15 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101209.k3AC9Fg3029097@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 ------- Additional Comments From rmo at sunnmore.net 2006-04-10 08:09 EST ------- any chance for a update to 1.2.6? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 12:34:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 08:34:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101234.k3ACYuvO001347@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-04-10 08:34 EST ------- (In reply to comment #18) > any chance for a update to 1.2.6? Here are the 1.2.6 packages. I have had these for a while but didn't announce them because there was talk of a new release that was supposed to happen shortly after 1.2.6 but the release was held back while another bug is hunted down. Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2.6-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2.6-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 12:49:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 08:49:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181444] Review Request: lcov -- process gcov output into nice html pages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101249.k3ACnVWa004560@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lcov -- process gcov output into nice html pages https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181444 ------- Additional Comments From Christian.Iseli at licr.org 2006-04-10 08:49 EST ------- Thanks. It all looks fine now, I think. No additional magic required :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From cw-spam at arcor.de Mon Apr 10 13:46:06 2006 From: cw-spam at arcor.de (Christoph Wickert) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:46:06 +0200 Subject: Changes in mock? Message-ID: <1144676766.3128.16.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Hi, I'm having problems with building a package in local core 5 or development mock. The spec says: > BuildRequires: xfce4-panel-devel >= 4.2, libxfcegui4-devel >= 4.2, libxml2-devel > BuildRequires: gettext > # only enable TLS support if a recent version of gnutls is available > # install libXt for modular X > %if "%fedora" > "4" > BuildRequires: gnutls-devel >= 1.2.0, libXt-devel > %endif Nevertheless gnutls noch libXt are not installed: > Executing /usr/sbin/mock-helper yum --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root install 'libxfcegui4-devel >= 4.2' 'xfce4-panel-devel >= 4.2' 'libxml2-devel' 'gettext' > > ============================================================================= > Package Arch Version Repository Size > ============================================================================= > Installing: > libxfcegui4-devel i386 4.2.3-4.fc5 extras 65 k > libxml2-devel i386 2.6.23-1.2 core 2.1 M > xfce4-panel-devel i386 4.2.3-3.fc5 extras 11 k I know it used to work since this package has been built in mock in February. Has something changed in the way mock resolves "%fedora" in the meantime? I can't find anything in the changelog. BTW: I see the mock configs for fedora-5-*-core.cfg lack "updates-released". Christoph From paul at city-fan.org Mon Apr 10 13:57:13 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 14:57:13 +0100 Subject: Changes in mock? In-Reply-To: <1144676766.3128.16.camel@hal9000.local.lan> References: <1144676766.3128.16.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: <443A6439.6090102@city-fan.org> Christoph Wickert wrote: > Hi, > > I'm having problems with building a package in local core 5 or > development mock. The spec says: > >> BuildRequires: xfce4-panel-devel >= 4.2, libxfcegui4-devel >= 4.2, libxml2-devel >> BuildRequires: gettext >> # only enable TLS support if a recent version of gnutls is available >> # install libXt for modular X >> %if "%fedora" > "4" >> BuildRequires: gnutls-devel >= 1.2.0, libXt-devel >> %endif > > Nevertheless gnutls noch libXt are not installed: > >> Executing /usr/sbin/mock-helper yum --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root install 'libxfcegui4-devel >= 4.2' 'xfce4-panel-devel >= 4.2' 'libxml2-devel' 'gettext' >> >> ============================================================================= >> Package Arch Version Repository Size >> ============================================================================= >> Installing: >> libxfcegui4-devel i386 4.2.3-4.fc5 extras 65 k >> libxml2-devel i386 2.6.23-1.2 core 2.1 M >> xfce4-panel-devel i386 4.2.3-3.fc5 extras 11 k > > I know it used to work since this package has been built in mock > in February. Has something changed in the way mock resolves > "%fedora" in the meantime? I can't find anything in the changelog. > > BTW: I see the mock configs for fedora-5-*-core.cfg lack > "updates-released". mock uses "yum groupinstall build", which in FC5's yum does not pull in the buildsys-macros package. http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg02015.html Workaround: Grab the buildroots.xml file from under http://fedoraproject.org/buildgroups/ for the distribution(s) you're building for, along with the buildsys-macros packages, copy them all to some local directory (e.g. /home/mock/buildgroups/development/i386/), then create your own local groups repo, e.g: # cd /home/mock/buildgroups/development/i386/ # createrepo -g buildroots.xml . Then edit your mock .cfg file for this target and replace the baseurl for the groups repo with your local repo, e.g.: [groups] name=groups #baseurl=http://fedoraproject.org/buildgroups/development/i386/ baseurl=file:///home/mock/buildgroups/development/i386/ Paul. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Mon Apr 10 14:04:25 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:04:25 +0100 Subject: sodipodi and architecture Q Message-ID: <1144677865.20705.46.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, The version of sodipodi in FE(3) has multiple architectures defined in the spec file for i386, i686 and athlon. I'd like to adopt this package, but am unsure as to which of these architectures should stay in the spec file given we haven't had an athlon release in ages and unless it's the kernel, very things have a i686 specific version. Advice appreciated. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 14:04:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 10:04:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175630] Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101404.k3AE4QTY018900@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175630 tcallawa at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2006-04-10 10:04 EST ------- All issues raised in this package review have been resolved in 0.41-29, this package is APPROVED. Nice work Axel, go ahead and put in your application for cvsextras access and I will sponsor you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From paul at city-fan.org Mon Apr 10 14:20:53 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:20:53 +0100 Subject: Build dependency exceptions Message-ID: <443A69C5.2040307@city-fan.org> Hi Spot, nice to see you're active on Extras again. Whilst you're here, have you any view on the subject of allowing buildreqs listed in the "Exceptions" section of the packaging guidelines being "optional" rather than "must not"? See: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg01484.html I'm not the only one who'd like to see the guidelines tweaked. Cheers, Paul. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Mon Apr 10 14:33:26 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:33:26 +0200 Subject: sodipodi and architecture Q In-Reply-To: <1144677865.20705.46.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1144677865.20705.46.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <20060410163326.69d4ac51.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:04:25 +0100, PFJ wrote: > Hi, > > The version of sodipodi in FE(3) has multiple architectures defined in > the spec file for i386, i686 and athlon. It checks the build arch so it can disable/enable MMX optimisations at build-time. FC is not available for anything less than i586, so building a binary without MMX support would be of questionable benefit, but: > I'd like to adopt this package, but am unsure as to which of these > architectures should stay in the spec file given we haven't had an > athlon release in ages and unless it's the kernel, very things have a > i686 specific version. > > Advice appreciated. To the best of my knowledge, Sodipodi in FE has been abandoned in favour of Inkscape (which had started as a fork of Sodipodi). Upstream, Sodipodi is still at 0.34 (February 10, 2004). From pertusus at free.fr Mon Apr 10 14:33:07 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:33:07 +0200 Subject: Build dependency exceptions In-Reply-To: <443A69C5.2040307@city-fan.org> References: <443A69C5.2040307@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <20060410143307.GB2312@free.fr> On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 03:20:53PM +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > Whilst you're here, have you any view on the subject of allowing > buildreqs listed in the "Exceptions" section of the packaging guidelines > being "optional" rather than "must not"? I am for a change, but having them optional may be a bit too permissive. In my opinion the right thing should better be something along 'discouraged' but non blocking. It would be messy to have all those unneeded buildrequires creep in spec files. -- Pat From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Mon Apr 10 14:35:02 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:35:02 +0100 Subject: sodipodi and architecture Q In-Reply-To: <20060410163326.69d4ac51.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1144677865.20705.46.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <20060410163326.69d4ac51.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1144679702.20705.49.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, > It checks the build arch so it can disable/enable MMX optimisations at > build-time. FC is not available for anything less than i586, so building a > binary without MMX support would be of questionable benefit, but: That was my thinking as well. > > I'd like to adopt this package, but am unsure as to which of these > > architectures should stay in the spec file given we haven't had an > > athlon release in ages and unless it's the kernel, very things have a > > i686 specific version. > > > > Advice appreciated. > > To the best of my knowledge, Sodipodi in FE has been abandoned in favour > of Inkscape (which had started as a fork of Sodipodi). Upstream, Sodipodi > is still at 0.34 (February 10, 2004). Depressing - I quite like playing with Sodipodi, but never could get the hang of inkscape! Is it worth adopting or is it one which should be just removed from the orphaned packages and be done with it? I have it built and working here. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From paul at city-fan.org Mon Apr 10 14:45:39 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:45:39 +0100 Subject: Build dependency exceptions In-Reply-To: <20060410143307.GB2312@free.fr> References: <443A69C5.2040307@city-fan.org> <20060410143307.GB2312@free.fr> Message-ID: <443A6F93.6040005@city-fan.org> Patrice Dumas wrote: > On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 03:20:53PM +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: >> Whilst you're here, have you any view on the subject of allowing >> buildreqs listed in the "Exceptions" section of the packaging guidelines >> being "optional" rather than "must not"? > > I am for a change, but having them optional may be a bit too permissive. > In my opinion the right thing should better be something along 'discouraged' > but non blocking. It would be messy to have all those unneeded buildrequires > creep in spec files. I could live with that. I'd hate to see us having specs like those for SuSE, which seem to list *every* buildreq and *all* of their deps, sometimes amounting to 50+ buildreqs. What a nightmare to maintain if package names changed. What I'm trying to avoid is things like a buildreq of perl for a perl module package being a blocker. Paul. From pertusus at free.fr Mon Apr 10 14:49:40 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:49:40 +0200 Subject: Build dependency exceptions In-Reply-To: <443A6F93.6040005@city-fan.org> References: <443A69C5.2040307@city-fan.org> <20060410143307.GB2312@free.fr> <443A6F93.6040005@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <20060410144940.GC2312@free.fr> > I could live with that. I'd hate to see us having specs like those for > SuSE, which seem to list *every* buildreq and *all* of their deps, > sometimes amounting to 50+ buildreqs. What a nightmare to maintain if > package names changed. > > What I'm trying to avoid is things like a buildreq of perl for a perl > module package being a blocker. That's also my aim ;-). -- Pat From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 14:52:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 10:52:15 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188477] New: Review Request: maildrop Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188477 Summary: Review Request: maildrop Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: ndbecker2 at verizon.net QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://nbecker.dyndns.org:8080/maildrop.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://nbecker.dyndns.org:8080/maildrop-1.8.1-1.4.src.rpm Description: Summary: maildrop mail filter/mail delivery agent Description: . Maildrop is a combination mail filter/mail delivery agent. Maildrop reads the message to be delivered to your mailbox, optionally reads instructions from a file how filter incoming mail, then based on these instructions may deliver mail to an alternate mailbox, or forward it, instead of dropping the message into your mailbox. . Maildrop uses a structured, real, meta-programming language in order to define filtering instructions. Its basic features are fast and efficient. At sites which carry a light load, the more advanced, CPU-demanding, features can be used to build very sophisticated mail filters. Maildrop deployments have been reported at sites that support as many as 30,000 mailboxes. . Maildrop mailing list: http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-maildrop . This version is compiled with support for GDBM database files, maildir enhancements (folders+quotas), and userdb. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 14:58:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 10:58:06 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188478] New: Review Request: fxload-2002_04_11.spec Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188478 Summary: Review Request: fxload-2002_04_11.spec Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: ndbecker2 at verizon.net QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://nbecker.dyndns.org:8080/fxload-2002_04_11.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://nbecker.dyndns.org:8080/fxload-2002_04_11-1.src.rpm Description: firmware loader was removed from FC5, but is still needed by some apps (e.g., plextor tv402u) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From tibbs at math.uh.edu Mon Apr 10 15:08:04 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 10:08:04 -0500 Subject: What todo with upstream content in .noarch.rpm format? In-Reply-To: (Rex Dieter's message of "Mon, 10 Apr 2006 06:18:18 -0500") References: <443A01AE.5090302@hhs.nl> Message-ID: >>>>> "RD" == Rex Dieter writes: RD> If you meant to imply these upstream rpms should forego the usual RD> cvs import and buildsystem, then no, can't/shouldn't be done. I think the problem is that upstream doesn't distribute tarballs, they only give noarch.rpm files. We can't just drop those in; there aren't even any SRPMs to review or rebuild. So Hans wants to know if he should just treat them as if they were tarballs and extract them with rpm2cpio as part of building extras-permissible packages. I think upstream should be begged for a more useful distribution format, but in the meantime it's not that much more difficult to unpack an RPM by hand and it produces the desired result. - J< From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 15:02:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:02:04 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188479] New: Review Request: numpy-0.9.6 Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188479 Summary: Review Request: numpy-0.9.6 Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: ndbecker2 at verizon.net QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://nbecker.dyndns.org:8080/numpy.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://nbecker.dyndns.org:8080/numpy-0.9.6-1.src.rpm Description: numpy is for numerical python. Proposed successor to numeric and numarray. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 15:14:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:14:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188482] New: Review Request: scipy-0.4.8 Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188482 Summary: Review Request: scipy-0.4.8 Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: ndbecker2 at verizon.net QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://nbecker.dyndns.org:8080/scipy-0.4.8.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://nbecker.dyndns.org:8080/scipy-0.4.8.src.rpm Description: scientific python. This version is for numpy-0.9.6 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 15:18:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:18:34 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187243] Review Request: lazarus : IDE and RAD tool for the free pascal compiler (fpc) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101518.k3AFIYRH000442@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lazarus : IDE and RAD tool for the free pascal compiler (fpc) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187243 ------- Additional Comments From joost at cnoc.nl 2006-04-10 11:18 EST ------- Updated to newest Lazarus-upstream version: SRPM: http://www.cnoc.nl/fpc/lazarus-0.9.14-1.src.rpm Spec: http://www.cnoc.nl/fpc/lazarus.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 15:24:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:24:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188261] Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101524.k3AFOqfc001902@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188261 ------- Additional Comments From notting at redhat.com 2006-04-10 11:24 EST ------- How is it a buildreq? I'll admit, I'm not 100% up on the perl build processes. -2 uploaded. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 15:34:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:34:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182040] Review Request: ratpoison - simplified keyboard-only window manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101534.k3AFYqgJ004925@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ratpoison - simplified keyboard-only window manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182040 ------- Additional Comments From jwb at redhat.com 2006-04-10 11:34 EST ------- Imported, plague FC4 builds, FC5 and devel fail on ./configure checking for X headers. Working on that now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 15:43:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:43:50 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188014] Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101543.k3AFhoL3007290@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188014 ------- Additional Comments From lukeross at sys3175.co.uk 2006-04-10 11:43 EST ------- Updated, http://lukeross.name/pam_otpw-1.3-4.src.rpm Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 10 15:50:12 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:50:12 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060410155012.DBAA68001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 1 clamav-0.88.1-1.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 10 15:51:31 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:51:31 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060410155131.E9C288001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 8 d4x-2.5.7-1.fc4 emacs-auctex-11.82-1.fc4 mmv-1.01b-4.fc4 nethack-vultures-2.0.0-3.fc4 perl-Class-DBI-AbstractSearch-0.07-1.fc4 perl-DBD-AnyData-0.08-2.fc4 perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit-0.12-2.fc4 ratpoison-1.4.0-3.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 15:46:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:46:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182254] Review Request: SS5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101546.k3AFkbQ7008364@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SS5 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182254 ------- Additional Comments From matteo.ricchetti at libero.it 2006-04-10 11:46 EST ------- Oh. Ok, I fix problem with init script: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/ss5/ss5-3.5.6-1.src.rpm?download Tell me if it works on x86_64 Fedora. Thx -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 10 15:53:11 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:53:11 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060410155311.6AA218001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 12 Macaulay2-0.9.2-22.fc5 d4x-2.5.7-1.fc5 emacs-auctex-11.82-2.fc5 fortune-firefly-2.1.1-2.fc5 gdeskcal-0.57.1-5.fc5 gonvert-0.2.15-1.fc5 mmv-1.01b-6.fc5 nethack-vultures-2.0.0-3.fc5 perl-Class-DBI-AbstractSearch-0.07-1.fc5 perl-DBD-AnyData-0.08-2.fc5 perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit-0.12-2.fc5 pure-ftpd-1.0.21-3.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 15:48:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:48:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188261] Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101548.k3AFmEgo008609@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188261 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-04-10 11:48 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6) > How is it a buildreq? I'll admit, I'm not 100% up on the perl build processes. Strictly speaking it isn't - yet. The Makefile.PL has it as a prerequisite and without it, you get this during the build: Checking if your kit is complete... Looks good Warning: prerequisite HTML::TableExtract 0 not found. Writing Makefile for Finance::Quote Normally that would spell imminent doom when it came to running the test suite (HTML::TableExtract would be needed in order to run any meaningful test), but in this case you get away with it because there isn't actually any test suite. Adding the buildreq now would make the package "ready" for when upstream actually provides a test suite and is just good practice anyway. The find/while/read/grep/mv loop in %prep could be simplified to: find . -name *.pm | xargs %{__sed} -i -e '/^#!.*\/usr\/bin\/perl/d' There is no changelog entry for the -2 revision. Other than that, looks good. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 15:49:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:49:11 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187932] Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101549.k3AFnBKT008765@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187932 ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-04-10 11:49 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) > * it would be nice to have a .desktop file Got an initial version. Still needs a little more work. Suggestions? > rpmlint is also unhappy with the debuginfo package. There are lots of 'objdump > failed', that I don't know how to solve, but there are also some errors, because > lots of source files have the executable bit set. It could be possible to chmod > -x everything ending in .h .c .cxx. Could be done later, however. Added these to the existing chmod -x command. > * I would have chosed BSD-like for the licence, but Distributable is ok too. I thought this was better due to multpiple licenses. > * I don't know how much the -data and other packages are coupled. But if they > are the specific version release should be required, like > Requires: %{name}-data = %{version}-%{release} Very good - done. > NEEDSWORK: there are many man pages distributed in the paraview-mpi package, and > some cmake files that I believe shouldn't be packaged, the man pages refer to > non existant header files. I suppose that they might be useful for something, but certainly not as currently installed. I'll remove. Again, just need the new spec: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/paraview.spec http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/paraview-2.4.3-3.src.rpm Still looking at the build issue... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 10 15:59:40 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:59:40 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060410155940.7FEDE8001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 14 Macaulay2-0.9.2-22.fc6 apt-0.5.15lorg3-0.3.rc1.fc6 crystal-stacker-themes-1.0-1.fc6 d4x-2.5.7-1.fc6 emacs-auctex-11.82-2.fc6 gdeskcal-0.57.1-5.fc6 gonvert-0.2.15-1.fc6 mmv-1.01b-6.fc6 nethack-vultures-2.0.0-3.fc6 perl-Class-DBI-AbstractSearch-0.07-1.fc6 perl-DBD-AnyData-0.08-2.fc6 perl-SQL-Abstract-Limit-0.12-2.fc6 pure-ftpd-1.0.21-3.fc6 yadex-1.7.0-4.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From rdieter at math.unl.edu Mon Apr 10 16:20:54 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:20:54 -0500 Subject: What todo with upstream content in .noarch.rpm format? References: <443A01AE.5090302@hhs.nl> Message-ID: Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: >>>>>> "RD" == Rex Dieter >>>>>> writes: > > RD> If you meant to imply these upstream rpms should forego the usual > RD> cvs import and buildsystem, then no, can't/shouldn't be done. > > I think the problem is that upstream doesn't distribute tarballs, they > only give noarch.rpm files. We can't just drop those in; there aren't > even any SRPMs to review or rebuild. We could kindly nudge them to provide the source to these rpms, since they *are* licensed as GPL afterall. Note the use of the phrase phrase "kindly nudge". Awhile back, I tried doing the same (but less kindly and more than a nudge) for another not-to-be-named-here software vendor who provides rpms (and source tarballs), but neither src.rpm nor .spec's, and got flame-blasted for even mentioning it. -- Rex From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 17:03:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 13:03:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188479] Review Request: numpy-0.9.6 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101703.k3AH37hR027825@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: numpy-0.9.6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188479 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WORKSFORME CC| |ivazquez at ivazquez.net OtherBugsDependingO|163776 | nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-10 13:02 EST ------- Version 0.9.5 is already in FE4+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 17:06:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 13:06:48 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188479] Review Request: numpy-0.9.6 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101706.k3AH6m7S028461@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: numpy-0.9.6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188479 ------- Additional Comments From ndbecker2 at verizon.net 2006-04-10 13:06 EST ------- Yes, and it's maintainer has invited me to pick this up - he says he is too busy. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 17:14:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 13:14:47 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101714.k3AHEl4F030308@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-04-10 13:14 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2.6-3.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2.6-3.src.rpm * Mon Apr 10 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.6-3 - Fix detection of libpri on 64 bit arches (taken from Matthias Saou's rpmforge package) - Change sqlite subpackage name to sqlite2 (there are sqlite3 modules in development). * Thu Apr 6 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie - 1.2.6-2 - Don't build GTK 1.X console since GTK 1.X is being moved out of core... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 17:16:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 13:16:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188496] New: Review Request: PyQt-qscintilla Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188496 Summary: Review Request: PyQt-qscintilla Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: rdieter at math.unl.edu QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/PyQt-qscintilla-3.15-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/PyQt-qscintilla-3.15-1.src.rpm Description: PyQt qscintilla extentions. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 17:17:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 13:17:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186919] Review Request: eric: Python IDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101717.k3AHHbNv031070@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: eric: Python IDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186919 rdieter at math.unl.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- BugsThisDependsOn| |188496 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-10 13:17 EST ------- See PyQt-qscintilla submission, bug #188496 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 17:18:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 13:18:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188479] Review Request: numpy-0.9.6 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101718.k3AHIslh031326@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: numpy-0.9.6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188479 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-04-10 13:18 EST ------- I'm more than willing to transfer the package once the sponsorship process is complete. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 17:22:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 13:22:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186919] Review Request: eric: Python IDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101722.k3AHM3hs031929@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: eric: Python IDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186919 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-10 13:21 EST ------- %changelog * Mon Apr 10 2006 Rex Dieter 3.8.2-2 - cleanup/drop unused bits - note PyQt-qscintilla submission Spec Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/eric-3.8.2-2.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/eric-3.8.2-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 17:29:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 13:29:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188499] New: Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188499 Summary: Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: rdieter at math.unl.edu QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/fedora/SPECS/ntl-5.4-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/fedora/all/SRPMS.stable/ntl-5.4-1.src.rpm Description: NTL is a high-performance, portable C++ library providing data structures and algorithms for arbitrary length integers; for vectors, matrices, and polynomials over the integers and over finite fields; and for arbitrary precision floating point arithmetic. This is a new dependancy required for Macaulay2-1.0 (coming soon). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 17:46:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 13:46:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188479] Review Request: numpy-0.9.6 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101746.k3AHk7bQ005324@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: numpy-0.9.6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188479 ------- Additional Comments From ndbecker2 at verizon.net 2006-04-10 13:46 EST ------- You said: "once the sponsorship process is complete". Is there some action required on my part? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 18:10:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 14:10:08 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188014] Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101810.k3AIA8vL010785@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pam_otpw - One time password support for PAM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188014 tmraz at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tmraz at redhat.com 2006-04-10 14:10 EST ------- All errors above seem to be corrected. rpmlint doesn't complain anymore. APPROVED You should contact the upstream author to include the GPL License text in a separate file too so it can be added as %doc file next time. I'll sponsor you after you create your account and request sponsorship for the FE CVS. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Mon Apr 10 18:23:34 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 20:23:34 +0200 Subject: What todo with upstream content in .noarch.rpm format? In-Reply-To: References: <443A01AE.5090302@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <443AA2A6.8010002@hhs.nl> Rex Dieter wrote: > Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>>>> "RD" == Rex Dieter >>>>>>> writes: >> RD> If you meant to imply these upstream rpms should forego the usual >> RD> cvs import and buildsystem, then no, can't/shouldn't be done. >> >> I think the problem is that upstream doesn't distribute tarballs, they >> only give noarch.rpm files. We can't just drop those in; there aren't >> even any SRPMs to review or rebuild. > > We could kindly nudge them to provide the source to these rpms, since they > *are* licensed as GPL afterall. > > Note the use of the phrase phrase "kindly nudge". Awhile back, I tried > doing the same (but less kindly and more than a nudge) for another > not-to-be-named-here software vendor who provides rpms (and source > tarballs), but neither src.rpm nor .spec's, and got flame-blasted for even > mentioning it. > We're are talking about noarch content only rpms, all there is inside is a bunch of .ogg files and an xml file. So there is no source and nothing to rebuild, aslo not much to review. This is why upstream chooses this format, because they think this way is the most end user friendly (although it is a bit unfriendly to non rpm distros). Regards, Hans From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 18:23:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 14:23:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188505] New: Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188505 Summary: Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: steve at silug.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple/perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple.spec SRPM URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple-0.12-1.src.rpm Description: This module is a simple wrapper around Locale::Maketext::Lexicon, designed to alleviate the need of creating Language Classes for module authors. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 18:34:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 14:34:58 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188499] Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101834.k3AIYwj4018368@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188499 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-10 14:34 EST ------- Sure takes a while to build... And no SMP make! (Not your fault, of course.) Is there some reason you have no %files section for the main package? Does this package only build static libraries? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 18:38:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 14:38:01 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188499] Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101838.k3AIc1Kn019156@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188499 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-10 14:37 EST ------- > Is there some reason you have no %files section for the main package? > Does this package only build static libraries? Yes, yes. (-: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 18:51:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 14:51:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188505] Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101851.k3AIpsiA023053@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188505 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-10 14:51 EST ------- RPM picks up no requirements for this package; shouldn't it at least require Locale::Maketext::Lexicon? I guess it's not strictly necessary but it seems pointless to use this package on its own with Locale::Maketext::Lexicon is already in extras. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 19:18:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:18:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188499] Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101918.k3AJIVF6030173@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188499 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-10 15:18 EST ------- There doesn't seem to be any precedent for having a -devel package with no base package, but looking at the (finally) built output of this package I can't see any other way you'd package it. It's just some header files, one ".a" static library and some documentation. There's also a debuginfo package created, but it contains no files. I think it should be disabled. Any other opinions? I see nothing else wrong with the form of this package, and will review and most likely approve it unless someone objects to the idea of having a -devel package with no base package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 19:20:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:20:58 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179802] Review Request: seamonkey In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101920.k3AJKwUr030832@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: seamonkey https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179802 ------- Additional Comments From caillon at redhat.com 2006-04-10 15:20 EST ------- Okay, looks good enough. There's a few issues still outstanding, but those are large hairy issues, and those exist in the mozilla package itself as well. Package APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 19:26:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:26:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188499] Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101926.k3AJQulU032038@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188499 pertusus at free.fr changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pertusus at free.fr ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-10 15:26 EST ------- Well there are some precedent. libnet, libcaca, the cernlib at some point, and others, I believe... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 19:29:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:29:22 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188499] Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101929.k3AJTM7v032646@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188499 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-10 15:29 EST ------- Also other Macaulay2-related static-lib pkgs: libfac, factory. I'll look into why/how -debuginfo is empty. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 19:59:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:59:42 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188499] Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604101959.k3AJxgOl006112@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188499 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |tibbs at math.uh.edu OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-10 15:59 EST ------- Sorry, for some reason I looked at the SRPMs. After seeing other packages that do the same thing I can find no more objections. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 20:05:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:05:04 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188505] Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102005.k3AK54Yd007177@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188505 ------- Additional Comments From steve at silug.org 2006-04-10 16:05 EST ------- -2 explicitly requires perl(Locale::Maketext::Lexicon). Thanks for the catch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 20:06:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:06:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188505] Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102006.k3AK6cOU007431@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188505 ------- Additional Comments From steve at silug.org 2006-04-10 16:06 EST ------- I guess I should have mentioned it is here: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple-0.12-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 20:16:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:16:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188376] Review Request: perl-Test-Tester In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102016.k3AKGu7H009358@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Tester https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188376 steve at silug.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From steve at silug.org 2006-04-10 16:16 EST ------- Oops, sorry about the order of the dependencies. Imported into CVS and builds requested. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 20:18:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:18:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187351] Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102018.k3AKIO6A009577@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187351 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-04-10 16:18 EST ------- Review for release 1.fc5: * RPM name is OK * Source bmpx-0.14.3.tar.bz2 is the same as upstream * Builds fine in mock * rpmlint of bmpx-devel looks OK * rpmlint of bmpx looks OK * File list of bmpx-devel looks OK * INSERT RESULT OF RUN TEST Needs work: * BuildRoot should be %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#BuildRoot) * Spec file: some paths are not replaced with RPM macros (wiki: QAChecklist item 7) * The BuildRoot must be cleaned at the beginning of %install * BuildRequires: gettext is missing (required by the %find_lang macro) * The package should contain the text of the license (wiki: Packaging/ReviewGuidelines) * Desktop file: vendor should be fedora (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#desktop) * Desktop file: the Categories tag should contain X-Fedora (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#desktop) * Scriptlets: missing update-desktop-database (wiki: ScriptletSnippets) Minor: * Duplicate BuildRequires: dbus-devel (by hal-devel), gtk2-devel (by libglade2-devel) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 20:26:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:26:15 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188378] Review Request: perl-Test-NoWarnings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102026.k3AKQFAl011197@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-NoWarnings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188378 steve at silug.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From steve at silug.org 2006-04-10 16:26 EST ------- Typo fixed in CVS. Imported in CVS and builds requested. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 20:26:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:26:27 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188376] Review Request: perl-Test-Tester In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102026.k3AKQREl011273@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Tester https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188376 Bug 188376 depends on bug 188378, which changed state. Bug 188378 Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-NoWarnings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188378 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 20:33:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:33:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188499] Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102033.k3AKXObD013383@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188499 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-10 16:33 EST ------- OK, builds completed in mock on i386 and x86_64 (development branch). rpmlint complains: W: ntl summary-not-capitalized high-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials E: ntl configure-without-libdir-spec The latter is bogus; this isn't a proper GNU configure script. Instead it's just a wrapper for a Perl script that doesn't take the usual arguments. Full review as soon as I get home from work. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 20:33:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:33:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188519] New: Review Request: perl-Module-Load Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188519 Summary: Review Request: perl-Module-Load Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: steve at silug.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Module-Load/perl-Module-Load.spec SRPM URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Module-Load-0.10-1.src.rpm Description: Module::Load eliminates the need to know whether you are trying to require either a file or a module. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 20:43:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:43:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188293] Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102043.k3AKhHbJ016358@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188293 ------- Additional Comments From notting at redhat.com 2006-04-10 16:43 EST ------- Yuk, so I have to have 7 random perl modules around just to run a test suite that doesn't affect the actual build output? Note that the HTML tests actually require HTML::ElementTable on top of TreeBuilder, and that's not in Extras, so adding the req doesn't help there. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 20:44:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:44:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188521] New: Review Request: perl-Module-Loaded Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188521 Summary: Review Request: perl-Module-Loaded Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: steve at silug.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Module-Loaded/perl-Module-Loaded.spec SRPM URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Module-Loaded-0.01-1.src.rpm Description: When testing applications, often you find yourself needing to provide functionality in your test environment that would usually be provided by external modules. Rather than munging the %INC by hand to mark these external modules as loaded, so they are not attempted to be loaded by perl, this module offers you a very simple way to mark modules as loaded and/or unloaded. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 20:45:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:45:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188261] Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102045.k3AKjKdS016827@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188261 ------- Additional Comments From notting at redhat.com 2006-04-10 16:45 EST ------- -3 uploaded with buildreq, sed fix, and changelog. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 20:57:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:57:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187932] Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102057.k3AKvIsZ019239@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187932 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-10 16:57 EST ------- I propose the following icon (from the big image found on the paraview site) http://www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/dumas/paraview_22x22.png and I attach a diff for the spec. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 20:57:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:57:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188523] New: Review Request: perl-Params-Check Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188523 Summary: Review Request: perl-Params-Check Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: steve at silug.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Params-Check/perl-Params-Check.spec SRPM URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Params-Check-0.24-1.src.rpm Description: Params::Check is a generic input parsing/checking mechanism. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 21:00:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:00:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188376] Review Request: perl-Test-Tester In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102100.k3AL00Pg019795@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Tester https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188376 Bug 188376 depends on bug 188380, which changed state. Bug 188380 Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Deep https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188380 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 20:59:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:59:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188380] Review Request: perl-Test-Deep In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102059.k3AKxxRj019780@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Deep https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188380 steve at silug.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From steve at silug.org 2006-04-10 16:59 EST ------- Imported into CVS and builds requested. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 21:00:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:00:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188378] Review Request: perl-Test-NoWarnings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102100.k3AL0N4S019881@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-NoWarnings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188378 Bug 188378 depends on bug 188380, which changed state. Bug 188380 Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Deep https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188380 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 21:03:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:03:35 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179802] Review Request: seamonkey In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102103.k3AL3ZiP020540@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: seamonkey https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179802 ------- Additional Comments From kengert at redhat.com 2006-04-10 17:03 EST ------- Thanks for approving!!! Before importing, I will create a new release. The only thing that will be new: I will increase the release number and add suffix %{?dist} as suggested on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/BuildRequests -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 21:16:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:16:13 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188527] New: Review Request: perl-Module-Load-Conditional Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188527 Summary: Review Request: perl-Module-Load-Conditional Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: steve at silug.org QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Module-Load-Conditional/perl-Module-Load-Conditional.spec SRPM URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Module-Load-Conditional-0.08-1.src.rpm Description: Module::Load::Conditional provides simple ways to query and possibly load any of the modules you have installed on your system during runtime. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 21:31:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:31:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187932] Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102131.k3ALVknl026112@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187932 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-10 17:31 EST ------- Apart from the .desktop that may be improved (feel free to use part of what I propose in the diff, but not necessarily everything), I think you could remove those requires Requires(post): /usr/bin/update-mime-database Requires(post): /usr/bin/update-desktop-database Requires(postun): /usr/bin/update-mime-database Requires(postun): /usr/bin/update-desktop-database -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From cw-spam at arcor.de Mon Apr 10 22:42:55 2006 From: cw-spam at arcor.de (Christoph Wickert) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 00:42:55 +0200 Subject: Changes in mock? In-Reply-To: <443A6439.6090102@city-fan.org> References: <1144676766.3128.16.camel@hal9000.local.lan> <443A6439.6090102@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <1144708975.3206.9.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Am Montag, den 10.04.2006, 14:57 +0100 schrieb Paul Howarth: > Christoph Wickert wrote: > [that he's having trouble with mock's macros..] > > mock uses "yum groupinstall build", which in FC5's yum does not pull in > the buildsys-macros package. > > http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg02015.html Ok, thanks for the pointer. Although I red this message before I wasn't aware that _this_ was my problem. Your workaround works fine here but does this mean I can no longer use any "%if "%fedora" >" statements in my specfiles? Chris From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 23:23:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 19:23:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188105] Review Request: torque In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102323.k3ANNHC4013332@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 ------- Additional Comments From garrick at usc.edu 2006-04-10 19:23 EST ------- (In reply to comment #7) > W: torque incoherent-version-in-changelog 2.1.0p0-0.3.200604071240 > 2.1.0p0-0.4.200604071240 > > the naming does not exactly follow the pattern in > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines > but it is pretty close -- could you please use the "YYYYMMDDcvs" > pattern per the guidelines? I'll add a "cvs" on the end. > W: torque-client unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/sbin/pbs_iff > E: torque-client setuid-binary /usr/sbin/pbs_iff root 04755 > E: torque-client non-standard-executable-perm /usr/sbin/pbs_iff 04755 > > These are worrisome. The unstripped binary can probably be fixed > in the rpm build somehow. And does the /usr/sbin/pbs_iff really > need to be suid? Yes, pbs_iff needs to get a priv port as part of TORQUE's internal authn system. > E: torque-mom non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/checkpoint 0700 > E: torque-mom non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/undelivered 01777 > E: torque-mom non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/mom_priv/jobs 0751 > W: torque-mom non-standard-dir-in-var torque > W: torque-mom incoherent-init-script-name pbs_mom > E: torque-scheduler non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/sched_priv 0750 > W: torque-scheduler non-standard-dir-in-var torque > W: torque-scheduler incoherent-init-script-name pbs_sched > E: torque-server non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/server_priv/acl_groups 0750 > E: torque-server non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/server_priv/queues 0750 > E: torque-server non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/server_priv 0750 > E: torque-server non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/server_priv/acl_hosts 0750 > E: torque-server non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/server_priv/acl_users 0750 > E: torque-server non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/server_priv/acl_svr 0750 > E: torque-server non-standard-dir-perm /var/torque/server_priv/jobs 0750 > W: torque-server non-standard-dir-in-var torque > W: torque-server incoherent-init-script-name pbs_server > > The above can probably (?) be ignored. > Yup, that's all correct. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 23:48:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 19:48:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187569] Review Request: xfce4-mailwatch-plugin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102348.k3ANmQpd017400@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xfce4-mailwatch-plugin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187569 ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-04-10 19:48 EST ------- Hi Kevin, thanks for your review. (In reply to comment #1) > Items needing attention: > > 1. The summary has "Summary: Quicklauncher plugin for the Xfce panel" > Shouldn't that be "Mail Watcher plugin for the Xfce panel"? D'oh! Fixed. > 2. Some of the dirs that this package owns are owned by lots of > other packages. > [...] > Perhaps require hicolor-icon-theme and xfce4-panel to make sure those > dir dependencies are met. Oh my god - I just realized that _all_ my panel plugins lack an explicit requirement on xfce4-panel! Going to fix this ASAP. With xfce4-panel we also have the dirs, at least the doc dirs: /usr/share/xfce4/doc /usr/share/xfce4/doc/C /usr/share/xfce4/doc/C/images No need to add hicolor-icon-theme since it is required by gtk2. > 3. Doesn't build in mock. Looks like it might be missing: > BuildRequires: imake libXt-devel imake is not required and libXt-devel BR is already included inside the "%if "%fedora" > "4""-statement. Unfortunately this is not picked up by mock on core 5 since it does not install the buildsys-macros-rpm. See https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-April/msg00582.html After fixing builtroots.xml the packge builds fine (again, the previous packages are mock-builds too) in mock. AFAIK all builthosts install the macros correctly, at least according to the logs of some of my latest builds where I'm using selective specfiles, too. Updated Spec http://home.arcor.de/christoph.wickert/fedora/extras/review/SPECS/xfce4-mailwatch-plugin.spec New SRPM: http://home.arcor.de/christoph.wickert/fedora/extras/review/SRPMS/xfce4-mailwatch-plugin-1.0.0-2.fc5.src.rpm %changelog * Mon Apr 10 2006 Christoph Wickert - 1.0.0-2 - Fix description. - Fix files section. - Require xfce4-panel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu Mon Apr 10 23:58:48 2006 From: sheltren at cs.ucsb.edu (Jeff Sheltren) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 19:58:48 -0400 Subject: Changes in mock? In-Reply-To: <1144708975.3206.9.camel@hal9000.local.lan> References: <1144676766.3128.16.camel@hal9000.local.lan> <443A6439.6090102@city-fan.org> <1144708975.3206.9.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: On Apr 10, 2006, at 6:42 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Montag, den 10.04.2006, 14:57 +0100 schrieb Paul Howarth: >> Christoph Wickert wrote: >> [that he's having trouble with mock's macros..] >> >> mock uses "yum groupinstall build", which in FC5's yum does not >> pull in >> the buildsys-macros package. >> >> http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/ >> msg02015.html > > Ok, thanks for the pointer. Although I red this message before I > wasn't > aware that _this_ was my problem. > > Your workaround works fine here but does this mean I can no longer use > any "%if "%fedora" >" statements in my specfiles? > > Chris It may be easier to do this: Edit your local /etc/mock/*.cfg files, and change the 'buildgroup' setting to be: config_opts['buildgroup'] = 'build build-base build-minimal' That way, mock will call yum as: 'yum groupinstall build build-base build-minimal', and you'll get all the packages you'd expect, and it saves you creating a local repo as Paul described. -Jeff From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 10 23:53:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 19:53:33 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185721] Review Request: yadex - Doom level/wad editor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604102353.k3ANrXJ0018181@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: yadex - Doom level/wad editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185721 wart at kobold.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-10 19:53 EST ------- Imported and built. Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 00:39:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 20:39:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188105] Review Request: torque In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604110039.k3B0dkNw027331@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-04-10 20:39 EST ------- (in reply to comment #8) Its my understanding that rpaths can be problematic (or at best just redundant) as described at: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/RpathCheckBuildsys But if you can convince me that they're harmless (even on multilib) then we can ignore the rpath rpmlint warnings that happen without the patch. I think its safer/easier to remove them but I could be wrong. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 00:49:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 20:49:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188542] New: Review Request: hylafax Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188542 Summary: Review Request: hylafax Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: faxguy at howardsilvan.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec URL: http://osdn.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/hylafax/hylafax.spec SRPM URL: http://osdn.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/hylafax/hylafax-4.2.5.5-1fc4.src.rpm Description: HylaFAX(tm) is a enterprise-strength fax server supporting Class 1 and 2 fax modems on UNIX systems. It provides spooling services and numerous supporting fax management tools. The fax clients may reside on machines different from the server and client implementations exist for a number of platforms including windows. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 00:51:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 20:51:22 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188542] Review Request: hylafax In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604110051.k3B0pMVq029697@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hylafax https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188542 ------- Additional Comments From faxguy at howardsilvan.com 2006-04-10 20:51 EST ------- This is my first package, and I am seeking a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 01:04:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 21:04:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188499] Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604110104.k3B14PBe031789@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188499 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-10 21:02 EST ------- So everything looks good except for the empty debuginfo package and the one capital H in the summary. Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. (Upstream should probably be nudged to include the GPL in their tarball.) * source files match upstream: 1d2a683ecbc12cdf03bf92dbc97c0dd4 ntl-5.4.tar.gz 1d2a683ecbc12cdf03bf92dbc97c0dd4 ntl-5.4.tar.gz-srpm * package builds in mock. * BuildRequires are proper. * final provides and requires are sane. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directory it creates (except for /usr/lib, allowed) * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * all headers and static library are in -devel package. (Everything is in the -devel package....) * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. * doesn't own directories owned by other packages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 03:39:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 23:39:01 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188505] Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604110339.k3B3d1QJ022164@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188505 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-10 23:38 EST ------- Builds fine in mock (development branch) and rpmnlint is silent. Issue: Owns %{perl_vendorlib}/Locale, which is also owned by a dependency. My understanding of the last MUST in the review guidelines is that this is a blocker. (Please feel free to correct me if I'm misunderstanding the point of that rule.) Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: 9a65312da2ae8d59f898151f9c044383 Locale-Maketext-Simple-0.12.tar.gz 9a65312da2ae8d59f898151f9c044383 Locale-Maketext-Simple-0.12.tar.gz-srpm * package builds in mock. * BuildRequires are proper. * final provides and requires are sane. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directory it creates. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * %check is present and all tests pass. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. X The package owns %{perl_vendorlib}/Locale, which is also owned by a dependency. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 07:19:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 03:19:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187964] Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604110719.k3B7Jc1D019167@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187964 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-11 03:19 EST ------- I'll do a review for this. But first please remove the ability to specify the scoreboard location from the cmdline and/or environment from hack, see comment 10 in bug 187392 (the rogue scoreboard story) for rationale. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 07:25:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 03:25:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175630] Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604110725.k3B7PdnR020505@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175630 ------- Additional Comments From pmatilai at laiskiainen.org 2006-04-11 03:25 EST ------- Have the configuration package provide "smart-config" or such and depend on that instead of the actual package name, that way it can more easily be replaced locally? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From paul at city-fan.org Tue Apr 11 07:39:55 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 08:39:55 +0100 Subject: Changes in mock? In-Reply-To: References: <1144676766.3128.16.camel@hal9000.local.lan> <443A6439.6090102@city-fan.org> <1144708975.3206.9.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: <1144741196.7363.23.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 19:58 -0400, Jeff Sheltren wrote: > On Apr 10, 2006, at 6:42 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > > Am Montag, den 10.04.2006, 14:57 +0100 schrieb Paul Howarth: > >> Christoph Wickert wrote: > >> [that he's having trouble with mock's macros..] > >> > >> mock uses "yum groupinstall build", which in FC5's yum does not > >> pull in > >> the buildsys-macros package. > >> > >> http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/ > >> msg02015.html > > > > Ok, thanks for the pointer. Although I red this message before I > > wasn't > > aware that _this_ was my problem. > > > > Your workaround works fine here but does this mean I can no longer use > > any "%if "%fedora" >" statements in my specfiles? > > > > Chris > > It may be easier to do this: > > Edit your local /etc/mock/*.cfg files, and change the 'buildgroup' > setting to be: > config_opts['buildgroup'] = 'build build-base build-minimal' > > That way, mock will call yum as: 'yum groupinstall build build-base > build-minimal', and you'll get all the packages you'd expect, and it > saves you creating a local repo as Paul described. Ah, now that's a *much* better idea. Thanks Jeff! You can still use the conditional builds in your spec files because the mock/yum versions on the fedora Extras buildsystem don't have this problem (yet), and I would expect there to be a long-term fix for this before the buildsystem got upgraded. You could read this thread for more: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-buildsys-list/2006-March/msg00016.html Paul. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 08:07:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 04:07:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179852] /dev/std* missing in mock - FE buildsystem In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604110807.k3B87v2f031203@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: /dev/std* missing in mock - FE buildsystem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179852 ------- Additional Comments From skvidal at linux.duke.edu 2006-04-11 04:07 EST ------- okay - if I'm reading this correctly we need: a new version of mock on the builders in order to verify if the patch that's been applied fixes the problem for building inside plague. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 08:25:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 04:25:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188505] Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604110825.k3B8PCBB001627@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188505 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-04-11 04:24 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > Builds fine in mock (development branch) and rpmnlint is silent. > > Issue: > Owns %{perl_vendorlib}/Locale, which is also owned by a dependency. My > understanding of the last MUST in the review guidelines is that this is a > blocker. (Please feel free to correct me if I'm misunderstanding the point of > that rule.) Corrected. All perl packages must own all directories below %{perl_vendorlib}, they use, otherwise they do not uninstall correctly and leave dirs behind. As previously mentioned by others in other threads the rule from the guidelines you mention above is badly phrased to say the least. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 08:26:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 04:26:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604110826.k3B8Q9TR001839@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 ------- Additional Comments From bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info 2006-04-11 04:26 EST ------- I declined you membership for cvsextras in the accounts system until you've found a sponsor -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 08:59:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 04:59:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188293] Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604110859.k3B8xv9Z009272@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188293 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-04-11 04:59 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6) > Yuk, so I have to have 7 random perl modules around just to run a test suite > that doesn't affect the actual build output? It would affect the build output if one of the tests failed, which might happen for instance when the package came to be built on an architecture you can't test yourself. The modules concerned are all available in Extras so there's no real hardship in installing them, and if you don't want them around on a long-term basis you could always "rpm -e" them afterwards. Better still, you could do test builds in mock and then those modules would never need to be installed on your system at all. Most of the perl module packages I've come across in Extras have buildreqs for all modules used in their test suites that are available in Core or Extras, > Note that the HTML tests actually require HTML::ElementTable on top of > TreeBuilder, and that's not in Extras, so adding the req doesn't help there. That's why I didn't ask you to include that one as a buildreq :-) Unless you'd like to package that one too... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 09:17:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 05:17:55 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187351] Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604110917.k3B9Ht8v012445@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187351 ------- Additional Comments From matthias at rpmforge.net 2006-04-11 05:17 EST ------- About the needs work : - That build root is plain silly with the chroot builds we have nowadays, and is the "preferred" according to the wiki. It makes mach builds fail, so it's not the one I use. - Please detail what paths aren't replaced, as I can't identify any at a first glance. - %{__rm} -rf %{buildroot} is already present right after %install... - If you look closer, gettext-devel is build required already... - COPYING added... it was missing from the tarballs some time ago IIRC. - I understand the guidelines as "if there is no desktop files, then include one and install it this way", but since the included desktop file is fine IMHO, I didn't touch it. If my interpretation is wrong, alright, but the Wiki section will need some more details. - update-desktop-database calls will be added, good catch! Updated package 0.14.3-2 available now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 09:27:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 05:27:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188261] Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604110927.k3B9R3ng014011@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Finance-Quote https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188261 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-04-11 05:26 EST ------- Review: - rpmlint clean - package and spec naming OK - package meets guidelines - license is GPL, matches spec, text included - spec file written in English and is legible - sources match upstream - package builds ok in mock for rawhide (i386) (with perl-HTML-TableExtract in local repo for now) - buildteqs OK - no locales, libraries, pkgconfigs, or subpackages to worry about - not relocatable - no directory ownership or permissions issues - no duplicate files - %clean section present and correct - macro usage is consistent - code, not content - no large docs - docs don't affect runtime - no .desktop file needed - module appears to retrieve stock prices correctly - no scriptlets Approved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 09:31:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 05:31:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604110931.k3B9VKYI014829@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ssmtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 ------- Additional Comments From wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro 2006-04-11 05:31 EST ------- 4th release available at http://wdl.lug.ro/linux/ssmtp/ssmtp.spec http://wdl.lug.ro/linux/ssmtp/ssmtp-2.61-4.src.rpm Changelog: release 3: - removed Requires: openssl - removed Provides: smtpdaemon - cleaning of %files - correct typos in version numbers in changelog - disabled "alternatives --auto mta" in %postun, pending more tests release 4: - added a small hack to make it compile on RHEL 3 Since this is my first package and its shape gets cleaner, I am looking for a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 09:35:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 05:35:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604110935.k3B9Z3c8015485@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 ------- Additional Comments From frank-buettner at gmx.net 2006-04-11 05:34 EST ------- Ok. And how long does it take to find one?? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 09:49:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 05:49:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604110949.k3B9na8g018139@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ssmtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-11 05:49 EST ------- > release 4: > - added a small hack to make it compile on RHEL 3 This is quite ugly. Maybe you could use what is on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag Moreover the CPPFLAGS setting should be before %configure, enabling not to set it explicitely for make. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From dragoran at feuerpokemon.de Tue Apr 11 10:11:41 2006 From: dragoran at feuerpokemon.de (dragoran) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 12:11:41 +0200 Subject: Fedora Extras (review) + Selinux Message-ID: <443B80DD.1080400@feuerpokemon.de> The current review process seems not to have any checks if the package works well with the selinux policy or not. This have to be changed. Their are some packages that does not work with selinux without changing the policy or disabling it. examples are: ifplugd needs policy changes to work fuse (sshfs) seems to mess up with the file contexts of /etc/mtab The only package with I have seen which is reviewed for selinux integration is initng. We have to find some way to track such things in the review process and update the wiki. From wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro Tue Apr 11 10:30:54 2006 From: wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro (lonely wolf) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 13:30:54 +0300 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: <200604110949.k3B9na8g018139@www.beta.redhat.com> References: <200604110949.k3B9na8g018139@www.beta.redhat.com> Message-ID: <443B855E.2090604@nobugconsulting.ro> bugzilla at redhat.com wrote: >Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional >comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. > >Summary: Review Request: ssmtp > > >https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 > > > > > >------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-11 05:49 EST ------- > > > >>release 4: >>- added a small hack to make it compile on RHEL 3 >> >> > >This is quite ugly. Maybe you could use what is on >http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag > > I would love to use those. But I cannot figure how to define those variables on my test machine. If I try rpmbuild -ba --with "dist el3" ssmtp.spec while in the spec I have a line like echo 0%{?rhl} 0%{?dist} the output is 0 0. I know I make a mistake, but I cannot figure which one. >Moreover the CPPFLAGS setting should be before %configure, enabling not to set >it explicitely for make. > > > moved From paul at city-fan.org Tue Apr 11 10:33:50 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 11:33:50 +0100 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: <443B855E.2090604@nobugconsulting.ro> References: <200604110949.k3B9na8g018139@www.beta.redhat.com> <443B855E.2090604@nobugconsulting.ro> Message-ID: <443B860E.3030907@city-fan.org> lonely wolf wrote: > bugzilla at redhat.com wrote: > >> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional >> comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. >> >> Summary: Review Request: ssmtp >> >> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 >> >> >> >> >> >> ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-11 05:49 >> EST ------- >> >> >> >>> release 4: >>> - added a small hack to make it compile on RHEL 3 >>> >> >> This is quite ugly. Maybe you could use what is on >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag >> >> > I would love to use those. But I cannot figure how to define those > variables on my test machine. If I try > rpmbuild -ba --with "dist el3" ssmtp.spec Use: rpmbuild -ba --define "dist el3" ssmtp.spec Or add the buildsys-macros to your .rpmmacros: http://fedora.ivazquez.net/files/macros.disttag Or build your packages in mock. Paul. From pertusus at free.fr Tue Apr 11 10:48:55 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 12:48:55 +0200 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: <443B860E.3030907@city-fan.org> References: <200604110949.k3B9na8g018139@www.beta.redhat.com> <443B855E.2090604@nobugconsulting.ro> <443B860E.3030907@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <20060411104854.GC2340@free.fr> > Or build your packages in mock. Going off-topic, but is it easy for rhel3? If so is there somewhere a package with the mock config files for that distro (and maybe others)? -- Pat From paul at city-fan.org Tue Apr 11 10:51:19 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 11:51:19 +0100 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: <20060411104854.GC2340@free.fr> References: <200604110949.k3B9na8g018139@www.beta.redhat.com> <443B855E.2090604@nobugconsulting.ro> <443B860E.3030907@city-fan.org> <20060411104854.GC2340@free.fr> Message-ID: <443B8A27.1050406@city-fan.org> Patrice Dumas wrote: >> Or build your packages in mock. > > Going off-topic, but is it easy for rhel3? If so is there somewhere a > package with the mock config files for that distro (and maybe others)? It's do-able but you may need to set things up manually: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legacy/Mock Paul. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 11:15:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 07:15:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188477] Review Request: maildrop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111115.k3BBFh4R003202@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: maildrop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188477 ------- Additional Comments From mfleming+rpm at enlartenment.com 2006-04-11 07:15 EST ------- This is a *very* old version of maildrop - 2.0.2 is current and is vastly improved on the old 1.x series. However newer versions dependent on a courier-authlib package at both build and runtime and no such package exists yet in Extras. Additionally, fam-devel no longer exists in Core (replace that with gamin-devel) and you might want to swap gdbm for db (--with-db=db in configure) as I find the latter a little more reliable. The spec definitely needs some work before it's ready for Extras (many of the %defines are not needed or not desirable, "make install" is preferred of "make install-strip" among others) On the upside, I've been packaging both this and maildrop for a while now (and courier-imap, but the spec file is a disaster area hence why I've not submitted it) If you want to try a more modern version I'm happy to put my courier-authlib package for review and you can build off of that. You can also have a look at the spec if you like (it too is built off Sam's distribution specfile but has been hacked around quite a bit since then) http://www.enlartenment.com/packages/fedora/5/SRPMS/courier-authlib-0.58-1.fc5.mf.src.rpm http://www.enlartenment.com/packages/fedora/5/SRPMS/maildrop-2.0.2-1.fc5.mf.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 11:53:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 07:53:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111153.k3BBrL5n011185@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ssmtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-04-11 07:53 EST ------- * the ugly CPP flag check can be probably expressed simply as | BuildRequires: krb5-devel # (perhaps implicated by openssl-devel in RHEL3) | ... | test -e /usr/include/krb5.h || CPPFLAGS='-I/usr/include/kerberos' * the 'Provides: smtpdaemon' is right; afais, it is used by other packages to express a requirement on a sendmail compatible CLI tool. Interpreting it as something which listens on a TCP port does not make sense because the daemon might be running on another host which can not be controlled by the local package-manager * sometimes ago, I packaged ssmtpd myself. In this package, the %install section was shorter: | %install | rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT | %makeinstall etcdir='$(sysconfdir)' GEN_CONFIG=/bin/true mandir="$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%_mandir/man8" | install -p -m644 ssmtp.conf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%_sysconfdir/ssmtp/ssmtp.conf I does not include your alternatives symlinks but is nevertheless a little bit shorter. * not a blocker on Fedora, but using '/sbin/update-alternatives' instead of '/sbin/alternatives' is more portable across the various Linux distributions. * I would not Provide: the man-pages; it is error-prone (see your 'man5/ssmtp.conf.5' entry) and you can not control how 'rpmbuild' packages them finally (perhaps bz2-packed or plain instead of gzip-packed) * I think, a real name would help significantly in getting a sponsor... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From splinux at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 11 12:01:41 2006 From: splinux at fedoraproject.org (Damien Durand) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:01:41 +0200 Subject: Two packages for a review. Message-ID: Hello, i've made two packages and i ask a review. - GLibrary : https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188435 - Dispatcher : https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188440 Thanks in advance. Damien Durand Fedora Ambassador -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 12:00:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 08:00:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111200.k3BC0uBf013159@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ssmtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-04-11 08:00 EST ------- For CPPFLAGS, why not just have: CPPFLAGS=$(pkg-config --cflags-only-I openssl) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 12:06:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 08:06:01 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187351] Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111206.k3BC61Qe014404@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187351 ------- Additional Comments From gauret at free.fr 2006-04-11 08:05 EST ------- Yeah, my fedora-qa script tends to give a lot of false positives, so it should be double-checked by human eye. It's much worse that rpmlint in this regard. I believe it can be useful though. I've fixed the problem detecting gettext-devel. The "absolute path" check greps for /usr and /var in the spec file, but I can't find that in the spec file from svn. You'll find the updated script at the usual place. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 12:27:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 08:27:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188477] Review Request: maildrop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111227.k3BCRqXR019004@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: maildrop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188477 ------- Additional Comments From ndbecker2 at verizon.net 2006-04-11 08:27 EST ------- I'm sorry, I meant maildrop-2.0.2. I didn't notice any need for courier-authlib. I don't have it and am using maildrop fine - maybe I'm not using those features? I'm only using it's mail filtering (as a procmail alternative). The spec file I used is from maildrop upstream with no change. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 12:33:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 08:33:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188574] New: Review Request: rss-glx -- Really Slick Screensavers Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188574 Summary: Review Request: rss-glx -- Really Slick Screensavers Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: nphilipp at redhat.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com SRPM: http://tiptoe.de/dav/rss-glx-0.8.1-0.2.src.rpm SPEC: http://tiptoe.de/dav/rss-glx.spec rss-glx is a collection of cool graphics hacks that can be used in conjunction with xscreensaver, gnome-screensaver or KDE. NB: The package does NOT contain the original source. I've included a modified tarball which doesn't include the matrixview hack as that one includes images from the movie itself and I find it highly likely that we don't have permission to include these. rss-glx is a collection of cool graphics hacks that can be used in conjunction with xscreensaver, gnome-screensaver or KDE. NB: The package does NOT contain the original source. I've included a modified tarball which doesn't include the matrixview hack as that one includes images from the movie itself and I find it highly likely that we don't have permission to include these. NB^2: I've opened a new BZ entry for this since the old one (bug #90133) was opened against a different Product/Component and was in state ASSIGNED. It seems to me that people thought someone already had commited to do a review due to that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 12:35:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 08:35:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 90133] Review Request: rss-glx -- Really Slick Screensavers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111235.k3BCZxaI020926@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rss-glx -- Really Slick Screensavers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90133 nphilipp at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE ------- Additional Comments From nphilipp at redhat.com 2006-04-11 08:35 EST ------- It seems to me that this BZ entry being in state ASSIGNED confused people about whether someone committed to do a review already, therefore I've opened a new one. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 188574 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 12:36:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 08:36:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188574] Review Request: rss-glx -- Really Slick Screensavers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111236.k3BCasOo021186@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rss-glx -- Really Slick Screensavers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188574 nphilipp at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jpb at dnaputer.com ------- Additional Comments From nphilipp at redhat.com 2006-04-11 08:36 EST ------- *** Bug 90133 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 12:49:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 08:49:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111249.k3BCnSYa023820@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ssmtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 ------- Additional Comments From wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro 2006-04-11 08:49 EST ------- Enrico: sendmail in Core has the man pages listed in Provides, this I why I have included them. Since Mandrake already has a ssmtp package and I only care about RH/FC, I have not modified the alternatives require. Paul: I love your idea, but this would add an additional Buildrequire for pkgconfig. So the question is: which way to go: a)simple and fast as suggested by Enrico (test -f ), b) elegant by using pkgconfig or c) using %{dist} (once I figure out how to use it, since %if ( 0%{dist} == 0rhel3 ) terminates the build ) ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 13:02:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 09:02:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188542] Review Request: hylafax In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111302.k3BD2CDX026381@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hylafax https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188542 fedora.wickert at arcor.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora.wickert at arcor.de ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-04-11 09:02 EST ------- There are too many issuse with your specfile to list them one by one. Just to name a few: - don't use "%define" for name and version - don't use "%define fc_rel", use "disttag" instead, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag - don't use epoch if not necessary - don't use "%define initdir /etc/rc.d/init.d". If you really need it, it should be "%{_initrddir}". - Source0 needs an absolute URL (http://...) - License field not valid, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-76294f12c6b481792eb001ba9763d95e2792e825 - remove "Packager:", see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-c17fb8c1ce9be40da720a2b25d1e2a241062038f - BuildRoot should be "%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)", see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-f196e7b2477c2f5dd97ef64e8eacddfb517f1aa1 - are you sure about the BuildRequires/BuildPrereq? - "Requires: rpm >= 3.0.5" ist stupid and can be dropped - try to use "%configure" instead of "./configure" and use $RPM_OPT_FLAGS correctly and not with make, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-f3d77b27a5d29dfc1f5600ef3fc836f2e317badf - no need to pass default options to configure (like PAGESIZE) - change "--with-AWK=/usr/bin/gawk \" to "--with-AWK=%{_bindir}/gawk \" - same for vgetty and mgetty which will become %{_sbindir}/[v|m]getty - doesn't use parallel make, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-525c7d76890cb22df33b759c65c35c82bf434d2e - use "%defattr(-,root,root,-)" instead of "(-,root,root)" - remove generic INSTALL from doc section. Not needed when installed from RPM. - macro usage inconsistent: {initdir} vs. {_initdir} which should be %{_initrddir} anyway, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/RPMMacros - empty %pre section - /sbin/ldconfig in %post and %postun is superflurious since the package doesn't put shared libs into the linkers path. - "chkconfig --del" belongs into %preun, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-220f87f993c84311859884f2a033a8706a2c7d7c - Requires(post)/(preun) missing for the scriptlets, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ScriptletSnippets?highlight=%28scriptlets%29#head-24ef9d59bda6032df14cf3cb433ce4ef09348f69 - no changelog at all, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-b7d622f4bb245300199c6a33128acce5fb453213 I'm not sure if we need to create a system user with a fixed uid/gid and use fedora-usermgmt. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 13:10:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 09:10:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187351] Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111310.k3BDActp028763@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187351 ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-04-11 09:10 EST ------- Yes you are right. I had to put my human eye but i had not enough time so i apologize. I will look more carefully to this next time. (In reply to comment #4) > About the needs work : > - That build root is plain silly with the chroot builds we have nowadays, and is > the "preferred" according to the wiki. It makes mach builds fail, so it's not > the one I use. Ok > - Please detail what paths aren't replaced, as I can't identify any at a first > glance. You had already modified their : these was the lines about gtk-update-icon-cache > - %{__rm} -rf %{buildroot} is already present right after %install... you are right. > - If you look closer, gettext-devel is build required already... you are right also > - COPYING added... it was missing from the tarballs some time ago IIRC. Ok > - I understand the guidelines as "if there is no desktop files, then include one > and install it this way", but since the included desktop file is fine IMHO, I > didn't touch it. If my interpretation is wrong, alright, but the Wiki section > will need some more details. I agree that the wiki section is not very clear about what to if a desktop file is already included in the source file but when i had this question i modified myself the desktop file to be according to the wiki. Maybe someone else could give more details about this or i will ask the question to extras list to make clarification in this wiki section > - update-desktop-database calls will be added, good catch! > > Updated package 0.14.3-2 available now. I will see the new version when i will be bak home -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From stickster at gmail.com Tue Apr 11 13:40:07 2006 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 09:40:07 -0400 Subject: 'which' no longer in buildroots.xml Message-ID: <1144762807.9764.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> The "which" package is no longer included in FC-5's buildroots.xml file: http://fedoraproject.org/buildgroups/5/i386/buildroots.xml In FC-4, this was part of the "build-minimal" group. Was this considered crufty and removable, or is this an oversight? If the latter, I can file a bug. If the former, can anyone help me understand why this was removed? This is sincere interest, not grousing; although it seems weird to have Python packages that use "which" in their build-setup scripts add this package as a BuildRequires, I'm OK with change. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 13:36:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 09:36:02 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188542] Review Request: hylafax In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111336.k3BDa2nT002460@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hylafax https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188542 ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-04-11 09:36 EST ------- BTW: There already is an outstanding review for hylafax, See bug #145218, but it seems like the reporter has lost interest. AFAIK metamail no longer is required for hylafax. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 13:47:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 09:47:08 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187351] Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111347.k3BDl8VD005060@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187351 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-04-11 09:46 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > About the needs work : > - That build root is plain silly with the chroot builds we have nowadays, What? The purpose is to protect users rebuilding the package. chroot's are completely irrelevant wrt. this. > It makes mach builds fail, so it's not the one I use. Irrelevant for FE. FE's buildsystem and normal user environments count. What you say only meany a bug in mach. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 13:49:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 09:49:08 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188542] Review Request: hylafax In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111349.k3BDn8NZ005347@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hylafax https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188542 ------- Additional Comments From faxguy at howardsilvan.com 2006-04-11 09:48 EST ------- I have seen Bug 145218. It does appear that the reporter lost interest. This request should replace that one. HylaFAX no longer has any dependency on metamail. (It really never did, anyway.) I'll address the SPEC file issues promptly. Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 13:55:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 09:55:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187351] Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111355.k3BDtq8L006876@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187351 ------- Additional Comments From matthias at rpmforge.net 2006-04-11 09:55 EST ------- So let's just say that this (silly IMHO) %(id etc.) suffix to the build root is the "preferred" according to the wiki, meaning it is encouraged to use it, but not mandatory. I don't like it, so I don't use it. BTW, it's totally useless when building with mock, which is the Extras way of building packages :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 13:57:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 09:57:06 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188477] Review Request: maildrop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111357.k3BDv6AD007249@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: maildrop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188477 ------- Additional Comments From ndbecker2 at verizon.net 2006-04-11 09:57 EST ------- I have looked at your suggestions and made a new version: http://nbecker.dyndns.org:8080/maildrop.spec http://nbecker.dyndns.org:8080/maildrop-2.0.2-2.5.src.rpm AFAICT, courier-authlib is an optional part. Does anyone object to omitting it? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 14:02:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 10:02:11 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188505] Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111402.k3BE2BWk008639@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188505 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-11 10:01 EST ------- I don't recall any other discussion about this; if there's concensus that the rule is flawed then why haven't the guidelines been updated? It's stated in two places: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines I'd update them myself but given that you didn't supply any references I have no real idea what should replace the existing text. In the absense of any clear guidance I'm going to go ahead and approve the package and in the future only check for erroneous ownership of things like %{_bindir} or %{perl_vendirlib}. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 14:19:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 10:19:42 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188309] Review Request: conserver - serial console server daemon/client In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111419.k3BEJgpn013215@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: conserver - serial console server daemon/client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188309 jima at auroralinux.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From jima at auroralinux.org 2006-04-11 10:19 EST ------- Built for FC-4, FC-5, FC-6. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 14:27:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 10:27:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188499] Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111427.k3BERCBv015038@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188499 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-11 10:27 EST ------- %changelog * Tue Apr 11 2006 Rex Dieter 5.4-2 - Capitalize %%summary - disable -debuginfo, includes no debuginfo'able bits Spec Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/fedora/SPECS/ntl-5.4-2.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/fedora/all/SRPMS.stable/ntl-5.4-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 14:34:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 10:34:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188505] Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111434.k3BEYOX9017508@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188505 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-04-11 10:34 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6) > I don't recall any other discussion about this; Though I don't have a reference to any thread discussing this issue wrt. perl packages at hand, this topic had been beaten to death and had popped up up at frequent intervals in perl dist reviews ;) > if there's concensus that the > rule is flawed then why haven't the guidelines been updated? IMO, yes. It's what most perl packages in FE do. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 14:51:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 10:51:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111451.k3BEpb46023514@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ssmtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-11 10:51 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6) > * the 'Provides: smtpdaemon' is right; afais, it is used by other > packages to express a requirement on a sendmail compatible CLI > tool. Interpreting it as something which listens on a TCP port does > not make sense because the daemon might be running on another host > which can not be controlled by the local package-manager It is not exactly what I concluded after that: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66396 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165957 There seems to be some disension and confusion on that matter. I don't have a firm opinion on that, but the fetchmail case seems to indicate that smtpdaemon is used to indicate a smtp daemon running locally on port 25. I agree that it doesn't make that much sense because having such a daemon installed doesn't mean that it is actually started, nor that it has not been tuned to ignore messages for some users, or listen on another port (or not listen at all...). If there isn't such package, however, it is certain that there is no local smtp daemon... > | %install > | rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > | %makeinstall etcdir='$(sysconfdir)' GEN_CONFIG=/bin/true mandir="$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%_mandir/man8" > | install -p -m644 ssmtp.conf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%_sysconfdir/ssmtp/ssmtp.conf This should work. A longuer version with an explicit overwritting of used variables on a make install line (instead on %makeinstall) would be even more suitable, in my opinion, given that the Makefile.in is done by hand. But %makeinstall and specific overriding seems fine to me too. Something along (haven't tested) make install bindir=%{buildroot}%{_sbindir} \ etcdir=%{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir} GEN_CONFIG=/bin/true mandir="%{buildroot}%_mandir/man8" > I does not include your alternatives symlinks but is nevertheless a > little bit shorter. There are also some more manpages, and the following lines are still usefull, do it must be longer anyway :-/: mkdir %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/ install -D -m 644 debian/mailq.8 %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/mailq.ssmtp.1 install -m 644 debian/newaliases.8 %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/newaliases.ssmtp.1 install -D -m 644 ssmtp.conf.5 %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man5/ssmtp.conf.5 ln -s %{_sbindir}/ssmtp %{buildroot}%{_sbindir}/sendmail.ssmtp ln -s %{_sbindir}/ssmtp %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/newaliases.ssmtp ln -s %{_sbindir}/ssmtp %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/mailq.ssmtp -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 14:55:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 10:55:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111455.k3BEtIvp024660@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ssmtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-04-11 10:55 EST ------- (In reply to comment #8) > Paul: I love your idea, but this would add an additional Buildrequire for > pkgconfig. So it would. I thought openssl-devel might have a dep on pkgconfig, but it doesn't. Ah well. > So the question is: which way to go: a)simple and fast as suggested > by Enrico (test -f ), b) elegant by using pkgconfig or c) using %{dist} (once I > figure out how to use it, since %if ( 0%{dist} == 0rhel3 ) terminates the build ) ? Try: if "%{?dist}" == ".el3" -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 15:27:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 11:27:11 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188499] Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111527.k3BFRBiq032065@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188499 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-11 11:26 EST ------- Looks good, builds OK on x86_64 and i386 and doesn't produce an empty -debuginfo package. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 15:37:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 11:37:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188499] Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111537.k3BFbc7u002599@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ntl: High-performance algorithms for vectors, matrices, and polynomials https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188499 rdieter at math.unl.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-11 11:37 EST ------- Thanks, importing... build queued. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 15:51:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 11:51:02 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185795] Review Request: fpconst (Python lib for IEEE 754) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111551.k3BFp2UV006897@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fpconst (Python lib for IEEE 754) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185795 ivazquez at ivazquez.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-04-11 11:50 EST ------- APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 16:16:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 12:16:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188458] Review Request: libassetml - xml resource database library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111616.k3BGG0DW014899@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libassetml - xml resource database library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188458 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-11 12:15 EST ------- It looks like there's an extra 'f' in the Source0: url: 'offset' -> 'ofset'. Also, the following line generates an error during the build. It seems that the info 'dir' file is not created during 'make install': rm $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_infodir}/dir -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 16:29:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 12:29:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179802] Review Request: seamonkey In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111629.k3BGTPQw019080@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: seamonkey https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179802 kengert at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From kengert at redhat.com 2006-04-11 12:29 EST ------- Package built into Development and FC-5. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 16:30:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 12:30:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177841] Tracker: New Extras packages that need a sponsor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111630.k3BGU045019300@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Tracker: New Extras packages that need a sponsor Alias: FE-NEEDSPONSOR https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 Bug 177841 depends on bug 179802, which changed state. Bug 179802 Summary: Review Request: seamonkey https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179802 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 16:42:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 12:42:48 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187932] Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111642.k3BGgmAY023724@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187932 ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-04-11 12:42 EST ------- http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/paraview.spec http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/paraview-2.4.3-4.src.rpm * Mon Apr 10 2006 - Orion Poplawski - 2.4.3-4 - Add icon and cleanup desktop file You'll want the src.rpm to get the extra source files. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 16:56:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 12:56:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188293] Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111656.k3BGuSXq026728@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188293 ------- Additional Comments From notting at redhat.com 2006-04-11 12:56 EST ------- Added, -2 uploaded. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 17:04:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 13:04:19 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188293] Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111704.k3BH4J9M028830@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188293 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-11 13:04 EST ------- This package is already approved; you can check it in at your leisure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 17:11:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 13:11:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188601] New: Review Request: ltsp-utils Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188601 Summary: Review Request: ltsp-utils Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: fedora at soeterbroek.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec URL: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/ltsp-utils/ltsp-utils.spec SRPM URL: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/ltsp-utils/ltsp-utils-0.22-1.src.rpm Description: Linux Terminal Server Project (ltsp.org) utilities for installing and configuring an LTSP server. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 17:14:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 13:14:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188601] Review Request: ltsp-utils In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111714.k3BHEQAV031769@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ltsp-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188601 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-04-11 13:14 EST ------- This package has Requires on a number of perl modules, most of which are not yet included as packages in FE: [x] perl-Getopt-Long [x] perl-IO-Socket [V] perl-libwww-perl [V] perl-URI [x] perl-Digest-MD5 [x] perl-Term-Cap -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 17:19:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 13:19:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188601] Review Request: ltsp-utils In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111719.k3BHJCw3000550@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ltsp-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188601 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-04-11 13:18 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > This package has Requires on a number of perl modules, most of which are not yet > included as packages in FE: > > [x] perl-Getopt-Long > [x] perl-IO-Socket > [V] perl-libwww-perl > [V] perl-URI > [x] perl-Digest-MD5 > [x] perl-Term-Cap perl(Getopt::Long), perl(IO::Socket), perl(Digest::MD5), and perl(Term::Cap) are all provided by the main perl package in Core. perl-libwww-perl and perl-URI are both in Core. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 17:35:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 13:35:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187294] Review Request: gwyddion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111735.k3BHZCwe004618@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gwyddion https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187294 ------- Additional Comments From yeti at physics.muni.cz 2006-04-11 13:35 EST ------- A new version that actually builds on FC5 and devel (not just FC4 and FC3): Spec URI: http://gwyddion.net/download/test/gwyddion.spec SRPM URI: http://gwyddion.net/download/test/gwyddion-1.15-0.3.src.rpm Still waiting for a review... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 11 18:08:59 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:08:59 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060411180859.4C5618001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 8 abiword-2.4.4-1.fc3 cogito-0.17.2-1.fc3 denyhosts-2.4b-1.fc3 docbook2X-0.8.6-1.fc3 enchant-1.2.5-1.fc3 git-1.2.6-1.fc3 link-grammar-4.2.1-1.fc3 powermanga-0.80-1.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 18:06:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:06:55 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186919] Review Request: eric: Python IDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111806.k3BI6trb012095@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: eric: Python IDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186919 ------- Additional Comments From ch.nolte at fh-wolfenbuettel.de 2006-04-11 14:06 EST ------- The build fails on my updated FC5 system with the following output: ... processing /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/svn svn.ra : importing ... ok, processing ... ok, parsing ... ok svn.client : importing ... ok, processing ... Traceback (most recent call last): File "gen_python_api.py", line 288, in ? processFolder(folder) File "gen_python_api.py", line 223, in processFolder processFolder(folder + os.sep + entry, prefix=prefix+entry+'.') File "gen_python_api.py", line 244, in processFolder processModule(module, file) File "gen_python_api.py", line 152, in processModule processName(entryprefix, module + '.', name, ns) File "gen_python_api.py", line 93, in processName exec 'hasdoc = hasattr(' + moduleprefix + name + ', "__doc__")' in ns File "", line 1 hasdoc = hasattr(svn.client.import, "__doc__") ^ SyntaxError: invalid syntax error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.80127 (%build) ... Could this be a dependency problem? Installing subversion-devel does not solve this problem. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 11 18:13:24 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:13:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060411181324.22E968001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 25 abiword-2.4.4-1.fc4 cogito-0.17.2-1.fc4 conserver-8.1.14-1.fc4 denyhosts-2.4b-1.fc4 docbook2X-0.8.6-1.fc4 enchant-1.2.5-1.fc4 fedora-package-config-smart-4-3 git-1.2.6-1.fc4 link-grammar-4.2.1-1.fc4 lyx-1.4.1-2.fc4 maxima-5.9.3-1.fc4 mercurial-0.8.1-1.fc4 mmv-1.01b-5.fc4 mod_security-1.9.3-1.fc4 moodss-21.2-1.fc4 moomps-5.6-1.fc4 perl-Test-Deep-0.093-1.fc4 perl-Test-NoWarnings-0.082-1.fc4 perl-Test-Tester-0.103-1.fc4 pikdev-0.9.1-1.fc4 powermanga-0.80-1.fc4 rogue-5.4.2-4.fc4 rpmlint-0.76-1.fc4 smart-0.41-30.fc4 yadex-1.7.0-4.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 18:10:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:10:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188601] Review Request: ltsp-utils In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111810.k3BIA9gv012900@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ltsp-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188601 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |wtogami at redhat.com, | |eharrison at mesd.k12.or.us ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-04-11 14:09 EST ------- This may potentially be in conflict with K12LTSP, so please coordinate with Eric Harrison and other K12LTSP people and obtain confirmation, integrate any necessary changes, or maybe an entirely different package is needed. This is a blocker. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 18:12:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:12:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186919] Review Request: eric: Python IDE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111812.k3BICqUk013789@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: eric: Python IDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186919 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-11 14:12 EST ------- What pkg(s) own /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/svn? rpm -q -f /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/svn I'd suggest trying to remove those, and build again. PyQt (and eric) are fragile, and it's best/easiest to build them in a clean(er) environment (like mock). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 11 18:20:29 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:20:29 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060411182029.7159E8001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 33 abiword-2.4.4-1.fc5 cogito-0.17.2-1.fc5 conserver-8.1.14-1.fc5 denyhosts-2.4b-1.fc5 docbook2X-0.8.6-1.fc5 enchant-1.2.2-3.fc5 enchant-1.2.5-2.fc5 fedora-package-config-smart-5-4 flumotion-0.2.0-2.fc5 git-1.2.6-1.fc5 gmpc-0.11.2-4.fc5 gnome-translate-0.99-7.fc5 licq-1.3.2-7.FC5 link-grammar-4.2.1-1.fc5 lyx-1.4.1-2.fc5 maxima-5.9.3-1.fc5 mercurial-0.8.1-1.fc5 mmv-1.01b-7.fc5 mod_security-1.9.3-1.fc5 moodss-21.2-1.fc5 moomps-5.6-1.fc5 perl-Test-Deep-0.093-1.fc5 perl-Test-NoWarnings-0.082-1.fc5 perl-Test-Tester-0.103-1.fc5 pikdev-0.9.1-1.fc5 powermanga-0.80-1.fc5 ratpoison-1.4.0-4.fc5 rogue-5.4.2-4.fc5 rpmlint-0.76-1.fc5 seamonkey-1.0-11.fc5 smart-0.41-30.fc5 subversion-api-docs-1.3.1-1.fc5 yadex-1.7.0-4.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 18:16:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:16:41 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188519] Review Request: perl-Module-Load In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111816.k3BIGfW4014834@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Module-Load https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188519 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-11 14:16 EST ------- * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: ee40eb2fa3059381e43d1f14d414fe67 Module-Load-0.10.tar.gz ee40eb2fa3059381e43d1f14d414fe67 Module-Load-0.10.tar.gz-srpm * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock. * rpmlint is silent. * BuildRequires are proper. * final provides and requires are sane. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directory it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * %check is present and all tests pass. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 11 18:25:05 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:25:05 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060411182505.05D188001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 35 abiword-2.4.4-1.fc6 cogito-0.17.2-1.fc6 colorscheme-0.3.91-1.fc6 conserver-8.1.14-1.fc6 denyhosts-2.4b-1.fc6 docbook2X-0.8.6-1.fc6 enchant-1.2.5-2.fc6 git-1.2.6-1.fc6 gmpc-0.11.2-4.fc6 gnome-translate-0.99-7.fc6 gwenview-1.3.1-5.fc6 licq-1.3.2-7 link-grammar-4.2.1-2.fc6 lyx-1.4.1-2.fc6 mercurial-0.8.1-1.fc6 mmv-1.01b-7.fc6 mod_security-1.9.3-1.fc6 moodss-21.2-1.fc6 moomps-5.6-1.fc6 nethack-3.4.3-10.fc6 ntl-5.4-2.fc6 perl-Apache-Session-1.80-1.fc6 perl-Finance-Quote-1.11-3 perl-HTML-TableExtract-2.07-2 perl-Test-Deep-0.093-1.fc6 perl-Test-NoWarnings-0.082-1.fc6 perl-Test-Tester-0.103-1.fc6 pikdev-0.9.1-1.fc6 powermanga-0.80-1.fc6 ratpoison-1.4.0-4.fc6 rogue-5.4.2-4.fc6 rpmlint-0.76-1.fc6 seamonkey-1.0-11.fc6 smart-0.41-30.fc6 subversion-api-docs-1.3.1-1.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From ville.skytta at iki.fi Tue Apr 11 18:28:06 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:28:06 +0300 Subject: Build dependency exceptions In-Reply-To: <443A69C5.2040307@city-fan.org> References: <443A69C5.2040307@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <1144780087.2677.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 15:20 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > Whilst you're here, have you any view on the subject of allowing > buildreqs listed in the "Exceptions" section of the packaging guidelines > being "optional" rather than "must not"? Added to FESCO schedule [1], will be discussed in this week's meeting unless it's resolved before it. [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 18:24:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:24:45 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188461] Review Request: xmms-musepack - Mpegplus (mpc) playback plugin for XMMS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111824.k3BIOjQu016949@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmms-musepack - Mpegplus (mpc) playback plugin for XMMS https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188461 eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr ------- Additional Comments From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr 2006-04-11 14:24 EST ------- Review for release 2.fc5: * RPM name is OK * This is the latest version * Builds fine in mock * rpmlint of xmms-musepack looks OK * File list of xmms-musepack looks OK Needs work: * Source 0 is not available (http://musepack.origean.net/files/linux/plugins/xmms-musepack-1.2.tar.bz2) (wiki: QAChecklist item 2) * BuildRoot should be %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#BuildRoot) * BuildRequires: gcc-c++ should not be included (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#Exceptions) Maybe you could add %{?dist} in the release. It could be usefull for next fedora version (ie fc6) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 18:46:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:46:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188461] Review Request: xmms-musepack - Mpegplus (mpc) playback plugin for XMMS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111846.k3BIkKMK023241@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmms-musepack - Mpegplus (mpc) playback plugin for XMMS https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188461 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-04-11 14:46 EST ------- > X MultiMedia System input plugin to play mpegplus, aka mpc files. _Musepack_ aka MPC -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Tue Apr 11 19:01:36 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:01:36 +0200 Subject: Seeking new maintainer for apt and synaptic Message-ID: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> Hi, apt/synaptic have been orphaned since about half a year, anyone objecting in me taking over? -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 18:57:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:57:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188601] Review Request: ltsp-utils In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111857.k3BIvC3Q026179@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ltsp-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188601 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-04-11 14:57 EST ------- I have contacted Eric Harrison to see if and where there may be a confilct with K12LTSP. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 11 19:05:35 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:05:35 +0200 Subject: Build dependency exceptions In-Reply-To: <1144780087.2677.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <443A69C5.2040307@city-fan.org> <1144780087.2677.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060411210535.38eea209.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:28:06 +0300, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 15:20 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > > > Whilst you're here, have you any view on the subject of allowing > > buildreqs listed in the "Exceptions" section of the packaging guidelines > > being "optional" rather than "must not"? > > Added to FESCO schedule [1], will be discussed in this week's meeting > unless it's resolved before it. > > [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule As long as we avoid BR rpm rpm-build gcc glibc-devel gcc-c++ libstdc++-devel fedora-release like the plague, I don't care about redundant BR. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 19:22:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:22:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188521] Review Request: perl-Module-Loaded In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111922.k3BJMEAg032062@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Module-Loaded https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188521 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |tibbs at math.uh.edu OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-11 15:21 EST ------- * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: bf2830c75b4ce78ebeee7f5ed074ea2a Module-Loaded-0.01.tar.gz bf2830c75b4ce78ebeee7f5ed074ea2a Module-Loaded-0.01.tar.gz-srpm * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directory it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * %check is present and all tests pass. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 19:30:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:30:27 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188542] Review Request: hylafax In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111930.k3BJURsl001256@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hylafax https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188542 ------- Additional Comments From faxguy at howardsilvan.com 2006-04-11 15:30 EST ------- Okay, I've made changes as suggested, please review the updated files: Spec URL: http://osdn.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/hylafax/hylafax.spec SRPM URL: http://osdn.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/hylafax/hylafax-4.2.5.5-1.src.rpm Yes, I am sure about the BuildRequires. HylaFAX uses libtiff development libraries to build, and the way that it uses those libraries plus the way that Fedora builds libtiff will also require the libjpeg-devel and zlib-devel libraries. The %configure macro cannot be used because it doesn't work for HylaFAX. HylaFAX has a configure script that is not made by libtools, although it is somewhat similar. Some of the default options are placed in the configure command in the spec file in cases where they will likely be variable depending on the builder's preferences. So, for example, PAGESIZE will likely vary between locale, and thus it is there for easy modification by the builder. (For those that build from SRPM.) Fedora puts mgetty and vgetty in /sbin and not /usr/sbin, and so %{_sbindir} cannot be used in those cases. I don't understand this: "I'm not sure if we need to create a system user with a fixed uid/gid and use fedora-usermgmt." and so I don't know how to respond to it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Tue Apr 11 19:41:49 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:41:49 +0200 Subject: Seeking new maintainer for apt and synaptic In-Reply-To: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> References: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <443C067D.7000206@hhs.nl> Axel Thimm wrote: > Hi, > > apt/synaptic have been orphaned since about half a year, anyone > objecting in me taking over? > Not really an objection, but do we want to confuse users with an extra way to manage repositories. Also APT AFAIK still doesn't handle multi-lib. Is there any significant reason to use apt instead of yum? Don't get me wrong choice usually is good, but this is a very fundamental piece of the distro, and becoming so more and more. We also have only one kernel, C-library and X-server and with good reasons. Regards, Hans From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 11 19:47:25 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 07:47:25 +1200 Subject: Seeking new maintainer for apt and synaptic In-Reply-To: <443C067D.7000206@hhs.nl> References: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> <443C067D.7000206@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <443C07CD.9060004@knox.net.nz> Hans de Goede wrote: > > > Axel Thimm wrote: >> Hi, >> >> apt/synaptic have been orphaned since about half a year, anyone >> objecting in me taking over? >> > > Not really an objection, but do we want to confuse users with an extra > way to manage repositories. Also APT AFAIK still doesn't handle multi-lib. > > Is there any significant reason to use apt instead of yum? Don't get me > wrong choice usually is good, but this is a very fundamental piece of > the distro, and becoming so more and more. We also have only one kernel, > C-library and X-server and with good reasons. > No, apt doesn't support multi lib.. However, in my work enviro, I have a mix of debain/RHEL/FC and using one package tool makes life, from a script view point, a heck of a lot easier. Michael From cw-spam at arcor.de Tue Apr 11 19:50:17 2006 From: cw-spam at arcor.de (Christoph Wickert) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:50:17 +0200 Subject: 2 questions about easytag Message-ID: <1144785017.16672.22.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Subject says it all: 1. Why is easytag in extras? The source tarball contains files from mpg321. Although the stuff is not used in the binaries I thought it's a no-go to distribute it and we should patch the tarball and remove all questionable stuff. Or move the package to livna. 2. Is it possible to see easytag unstable (1.99.12 ATM) in extras? I'm using this package a lot so I rolled my own rpm and it's pretty stable (IMO at least as stable as the 1.1 release). With yesterdays update the annoying cddb bug is fixed, so I don't see no blocker there. Easytag 1.1 depends on gtk+. C'mon - let's get rid of this old crap ASAP, at least in development! Chris From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Tue Apr 11 19:54:35 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:54:35 +0200 Subject: Seeking new maintainer for apt and synaptic In-Reply-To: <443C067D.7000206@hhs.nl> References: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> <443C067D.7000206@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <20060411195435.GF17716@neu.nirvana> On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 09:41:49PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Axel Thimm wrote: > > apt/synaptic have been orphaned since about half a year, anyone > > objecting in me taking over? > > Not really an objection, but do we want to confuse users with an extra > way to manage repositories. Also APT AFAIK still doesn't handle multi-lib. > > Is there any significant reason to use apt instead of yum? Don't get me > wrong choice usually is good, but this is a very fundamental piece of > the distro, and becoming so more and more. We also have only one kernel, > C-library and X-server and with good reasons. I was just asking about maintainership, not replacing yum with apt in Fedora Core ;) Also apt has seen quite some development lately including multilib and repomd support. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 19:48:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:48:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175630] Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111948.k3BJmnb3005678@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175630 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-11 15:48 EST ------- (In reply to comment #13) > Have the configuration package provide "smart-config" or such and depend on that > instead of the actual package name, that way it can more easily be replaced > locally? +1 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 19:51:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:51:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185239] Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111951.k3BJpOrA005972@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smart -- Next generation package handling tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185239 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE OtherBugsDependingO|163776 | nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-11 15:51 EST ------- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 175630 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 19:51:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:51:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175630] Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111951.k3BJpxu6006134@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smart - Next generation package handling tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175630 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-11 15:51 EST ------- *** Bug 185239 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 19:53:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:53:47 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175631] Review Request: fedora-package-config-smart - Configuration files for the smart package manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604111953.k3BJrlUC006412@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fedora-package-config-smart - Configuration files for the smart package manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175631 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-11 15:53 EST ------- Nitpick: including the source files separately in the SRPM instead of rolling them in a tarball would be more developer friendly (think CVS checkouts, diffs, commit mails). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 20:02:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 16:02:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188623] New: Review Request: SOAPpy - Full-featured SOAP library for Python Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188623 Summary: Review Request: SOAPpy - Full-featured SOAP library for Python Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: tkmame at retrogames.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/SOAPpy.spec SRPM URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/ Description: The goal of the SOAPpy team is to provide a full-featured SOAP library for Python that is very simple to use and that fully supports dynamic interaction between clients and servers. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 20:06:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 16:06:27 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188429] Review Request: glib In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604112006.k3BK6RS8008314@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: glib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188429 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |ville.skytta at iki.fi OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-11 16:05 EST ------- * rpmlint messages needing action: E: glib non-utf8-spec-file glib.spec --> use eg. iconv to convert it (from iso-8859-1, I guess) W: glib unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/libgmodule-1.2.so.0.0.10 --> executable bits missing * %description (the last sentence) could be updated considering that glib 1.x is legacy stuff, "will depend" is a bit bold a statement nowadays :) * "|| :" at end of %check is superfluous -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From seg at haxxed.com Tue Apr 11 20:32:28 2006 From: seg at haxxed.com (Callum Lerwick) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:32:28 -0500 Subject: Seeking new maintainer for apt and synaptic In-Reply-To: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> References: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1144787549.30844.33.camel@hamburger.booze> On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 21:01 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > Hi, > > apt/synaptic have been orphaned since about half a year, anyone > objecting in me taking over? There was these messages from a while back: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-February/msg00658.html https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-February/msg00688.html But it appears no one actually took ownership. Panu's multilib apt seems to have mysteriously appeared in the devel branch recently, but no builds have been pushed. I tried building it myself on x86_64 and it crashed and burned when run. Haven't tried it on i386 yet. Panu's apt also seems to use yum metadata instead of apt. Nice. I've got an aptitude package waiting in the wings, if someone gets apt functional again. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 20:31:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 16:31:04 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188625] New: Review Request: AllegroOgg - Ogg library for use with the Allegro game library Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188625 Summary: Review Request: AllegroOgg - Ogg library for use with the Allegro game library Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec URL: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/AleegroOgg.spec SRPM URL: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/AleegroOgg-1.0.3-1.src.rpm Description: AllegroOGG is an Allegro wrapper for the Ogg Vorbis decoder from the Xiph.org foundation. This lib lets you play OGGs and convert OGGs to Allegro SAMPLEs amongst a lot of other capabilites. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 20:34:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 16:34:34 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188458] Review Request: libassetml - xml resource database library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604112034.k3BKYXGd013925@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libassetml - xml resource database library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188458 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-11 16:34 EST ------- Thanks for catching the double ff. The other one is strange I added the rm because on my system the build did create a dir file, anyways I've changed the rm to an "rm -f" so it will work in either case. New version, SRPM this time at: http://home.zonnet.nl/jwrdegoede/libassetml-1.2.1-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 20:36:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 16:36:33 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188601] Review Request: ltsp-utils In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604112036.k3BKaXws014317@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ltsp-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188601 ------- Additional Comments From eharrison at mesd.k12.or.us 2006-04-11 16:36 EST ------- Looks good to me. I considered this a while back when packaging LTSP for K12LTSP. Adding the ltsp-utils package to FE will not cause a problem for existing K12LTSP installations. In fact, I'll probably remove these files from my package and add a requirement for this package. Thanks for the heads-up! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 20:37:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 16:37:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188625] Review Request: AllegroOgg - Ogg library for use with the Allegro game library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604112037.k3BKbTSC014573@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: AllegroOgg - Ogg library for use with the Allegro game library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188625 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-11 16:37 EST ------- Before I forget the ugly name is because there are 2 alogg libraries out there, one which is called just alogg and one which is called AllegroOgg but still use alogg as soname. I hope we never need the other alogg otherwise I see a problem, but with this name atleast its clear which alogg this is. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From seg at haxxed.com Tue Apr 11 20:42:36 2006 From: seg at haxxed.com (Callum Lerwick) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:42:36 -0500 Subject: 2 questions about easytag In-Reply-To: <1144785017.16672.22.camel@hal9000.local.lan> References: <1144785017.16672.22.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: <1144788157.30844.39.camel@hamburger.booze> On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 21:50 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > 2. Is it possible to see easytag unstable (1.99.12 ATM) in extras? I'm > using this package a lot so I rolled my own rpm and it's pretty stable > (IMO at least as stable as the 1.1 release). With yesterdays update the > annoying cddb bug is fixed, so I don't see no blocker there. Easytag 1.1 > depends on gtk+. C'mon - let's get rid of this old crap ASAP, at least > in development! Easytag kicks ass. It sure would be nice to have a GTK2 version. Looks like its maintained by Matthias, and 1.99.12 is already available in freshrpms. You could probably poke him to see about moving to 1.99. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From ville.skytta at iki.fi Tue Apr 11 21:00:12 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 00:00:12 +0300 Subject: Seeking new maintainer for apt and synaptic In-Reply-To: <1144787549.30844.33.camel@hamburger.booze> References: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> <1144787549.30844.33.camel@hamburger.booze> Message-ID: <1144789212.2677.67.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 15:32 -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote: > Panu's multilib apt seems > to have mysteriously appeared in the devel branch recently, I'm behind that mystery, with Panu's assistance. The mystery is dissolved somewhat if one reads the extras-commits mailing list. > but no builds have been pushed. Sure there have, several, the last one was pushed to the public repo yesterday. Obviously, they're in devel only for now. > I tried building it myself on x86_64 and it > crashed and burned when run. Haven't tried it on i386 yet. I've used it lightly on both x86_64 and i386 (FC5), worked for me. There were some slightly rough edges which have mostly disappeared towards/in 0.5.15lorg3-rc1. I bet filing your findings in Bugzilla wouldn't hurt... From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 20:58:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 16:58:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188625] Review Request: AllegroOgg - Ogg library for use with the Allegro game library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604112058.k3BKwUIe019338@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: AllegroOgg - Ogg library for use with the Allegro game library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188625 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-11 16:58 EST ------- s/AllegroOgg/allegro-ogg/ ? BTW, the name is so ugly that you seem to have misspelled it in the URLs (AleegroOgg) :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 11 21:10:46 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:10:46 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-11 Message-ID: <20060411211046.7114.33878@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch wine-cms 0.9.11-2.fc3.i386 ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: wine-cms - 0.9.11-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: liblcms.so.1 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 11 21:10:53 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:10:53 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-11 Message-ID: <20060411211053.7118.94395@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch wine-cms 0.9.11-2.fc4.i386 ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: wine-cms - 0.9.11-2.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: liblcms.so.1 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 11 21:11:01 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:11:01 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-11 Message-ID: <20060411211101.7121.1675@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 11 21:11:09 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:11:09 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-11 Message-ID: <20060411211109.7125.81814@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 smart 0.41-30.fc6.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc smart 0.41-30.fc6.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 smart 0.41-30.fc6.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== New report for: Axel.Thimm AT ATrpms.net package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart ====================================================================== package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0()(64bit) libglade gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 From triad at df.lth.se Tue Apr 11 21:33:03 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 23:33:03 +0200 (CEST) Subject: 2 questions about easytag In-Reply-To: <1144785017.16672.22.camel@hal9000.local.lan> References: <1144785017.16672.22.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Christoph Wickert wrote: > 1. Why is easytag in extras? The source tarball contains files from > mpg321. AFAIK it only use portions of mpg321 that are needed to extract metadata from the MPEG stream, such as bitrate and frame types, thus determining the play length. The MPEG stream format is, I believe unproblematic, it is when you populate it with Layer 3 audio ("mp3") and encode/decode that that the patent problems start. So the portions from mpg321 used are safe, thus it can stay in the extras - patents does not contaminate by proximity, the fact that other files in mpg321 are problematic does not make these files problematic. Linus From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 11 21:26:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 17:26:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604112126.k3BLQktN024226@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ssmtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 ------- Additional Comments From wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro 2006-04-11 17:26 EST ------- Thank you all for ideas. I have uploaded a new version, based on %{dist}. It can be found at: Spec file : http://wdl.lug.ro/linux/ssmtp/ssmtp.spec SRPM : http://wdl.lug.ro/linux/ssmtp/ssmtp-2.61-5.src.rpm Following Enrico's argument (actually that was my initial reasoning, too...) I have added back the Provides: smtpdaemon. %Changelog * Tue Apr 11 2006 lonely wolfy 2.61-5 - cleaner hack for RHEL 3 - added back Provides: smtpdaemon - correct typo in Provides -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From pertusus at free.fr Tue Apr 11 22:18:08 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 00:18:08 +0200 Subject: Seeking new maintainer for apt and synaptic In-Reply-To: <443C067D.7000206@hhs.nl> References: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> <443C067D.7000206@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <20060411221808.GA2361@free.fr> > the distro, and becoming so more and more. We also have only one kernel, > C-library and X-server and with good reasons. One kernel, yes, but for the other we could have alternatives. dietlibc is sort of an alternative of the libc and whenever/if there is a X substitute it could be fine to have it packaged. Hopefully with initng we'll have soon 2 init systems... Oh, even a alternate kernel could be doable - but not in the installer, of course. Maybe one day there will be a hurd in extras ;-) It's not even clear to me what piece of core couldn't be provided in extras, except for very basic config files. Even basic unix commands could come from a alternate implementation (like busybox) with other names, of course. Maybe rpm? It will come a long way until it is possible to have a running system installed from fedora core but without any component of fedora core used, but it could be sortof funny. Interesting dream, isn't it ;-) -- Pat From seg at haxxed.com Tue Apr 11 23:30:57 2006 From: seg at haxxed.com (Callum Lerwick) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 18:30:57 -0500 Subject: Seeking new maintainer for apt and synaptic In-Reply-To: <1144789212.2677.67.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> <1144787549.30844.33.camel@hamburger.booze> <1144789212.2677.67.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1144798257.30844.45.camel@hamburger.booze> On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 00:00 +0300, Ville Skytt? wrote: > Sure there have, several, the last one was pushed to the public repo > yesterday. Obviously, they're in devel only for now. Awesome. Its been a while since I messed with it last. > I've used it lightly on both x86_64 and i386 (FC5), worked for me. > There were some slightly rough edges which have mostly disappeared > towards/in 0.5.15lorg3-rc1. I bet filing your findings in Bugzilla > wouldn't hurt... Maybe I snagged it when it was broke. When I get some time I'll poke at it more. I really want to use aptitude again. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From jpmahowald at gmail.com Wed Apr 12 00:14:02 2006 From: jpmahowald at gmail.com (John Mahowald) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 19:14:02 -0500 Subject: Tenable license on nessus plugins Message-ID: <3ea997540604111714q4c8b411fw1a2177bbe8f76b56@mail.gmail.com> Hello. I'm looking forward to finishing the review for nessus plugins [1] to actually make it useful, but I may have hit a legal snag. Some of the plugins may be licensed under the Tenable license, which states among other things: "You shall not, directly or indirectly: (i) sell, lease, rent, license, sublicense, distribute, redistribute or transfer any Plugins or any of your rights under this Agreement; (ii) modify, translate, reverse engineer (except to the limited extent permitted by law), decompile, disassemble or create derivative works based on any Plugins; (iii) use any Plugins other than in conjunction with Registered Nessus or NeWT Scanners obtained directly from www.nessus.org or www.tenablesecurity.com to detect vulnerabilities on your own system or network or on the system or network; or (iv) remove, alter or obscure any proprietary notice, labels or marks on any Plugins." Seems too restrictive to me. Which if any plugins fall under this? Can they be included? [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185799 From kevin.kofler at chello.at Wed Apr 12 01:02:46 2006 From: kevin.kofler at chello.at (Kevin Kofler) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 01:02:46 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Tenable license on nessus plugins References: <3ea997540604111714q4c8b411fw1a2177bbe8f76b56@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: > "You shall not, directly or indirectly: (i) sell, lease, rent, license, > sublicense, distribute, redistribute or transfer any Plugins or > any of your rights under this Agreement; (ii) modify, translate, > reverse engineer (except to the limited extent permitted by law), > decompile, disassemble or create derivative works based on any > Plugins; (iii) use any Plugins other than in conjunction with > Registered Nessus or NeWT Scanners obtained directly from > www.nessus.org or www.tenablesecurity.com to detect > vulnerabilities on your own system or network or on the system or > network; or (iv) remove, alter or obscure any proprietary notice, > labels or marks on any Plugins." This is obviously neither Free Software nor Open Source nor even anywhere near! So IMHO this is completely unacceptable. Kevin Kofler PS: This is some filler text so the GMANE posting interface stops complaining about me quoting too much and not posting enough content of my own. Please ignore. Sorry for the inconvenience. I hate dumb filters. From mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 12 02:32:41 2006 From: mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org (Mike McGrath) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:32:41 -0500 Subject: Tenable license on nessus plugins In-Reply-To: References: <3ea997540604111714q4c8b411fw1a2177bbe8f76b56@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3237e4410604111932o520ac976o9b675a3e5fea3543@mail.gmail.com> Perhaps I'm missing something here but isn't the nessus-update-plugins script that comes with nessus enough? I mean, its a little odd but is that acceptable? Do the individual plugins come with licenses? If so can you filter out the bad license plugins? Its a crap job but might be your only other choice. -Mike From mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 12 02:35:47 2006 From: mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org (Mike McGrath) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:35:47 -0500 Subject: Tenable license on nessus plugins In-Reply-To: <3237e4410604111932o520ac976o9b675a3e5fea3543@mail.gmail.com> References: <3ea997540604111714q4c8b411fw1a2177bbe8f76b56@mail.gmail.com> <3237e4410604111932o520ac976o9b675a3e5fea3543@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3237e4410604111935s137f6c91qe019abf34b1bc3c@mail.gmail.com> On 4/11/06, Mike McGrath wrote: > Perhaps I'm missing something here but isn't the nessus-update-plugins > script that comes with nessus enough? I mean, its a little odd but is > that acceptable? > > Do the individual plugins come with licenses? If so can you filter > out the bad license plugins? Its a crap job but might be your only > other choice. > > -Mike > On second read: -------------- use any Plugins other than in conjunction with Registered Nessus or NeWT Scanners obtained directly from www.nessus.org or www.tenablesecurity.com to detect vulnerabilities on your own system or network or on the system or network ----------------- That's not good at all. Perhaps a request to upstream is needed for special permission for use in Fedora? Seeing as the next version of Nessus is closed source you might just get lucky. -Mike From steve at silug.org Wed Apr 12 02:41:34 2006 From: steve at silug.org (Steven Pritchard) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:41:34 -0500 Subject: Seeking new maintainer for apt and synaptic In-Reply-To: <1144787549.30844.33.camel@hamburger.booze> References: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> <1144787549.30844.33.camel@hamburger.booze> Message-ID: <20060412024134.GA5646@osiris.silug.org> On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 03:32:28PM -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote: > There was these messages from a while back: > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-February/msg00658.html > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-February/msg00688.html > > But it appears no one actually took ownership. I was scared away from the job. ;-) Steve -- Steven Pritchard - K&S Pritchard Enterprises, Inc. Email: steve at kspei.com http://www.kspei.com/ Phone: (618)398-3000 Mobile: (618)567-7320 From paul at city-fan.org Wed Apr 12 07:57:32 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 08:57:32 +0100 Subject: rpms/perl-HTML-TableExtract/FC-5 perl-HTML-TableExtract.spec, 1.1, 1.2 In-Reply-To: <200604112142.k3BLgafP004597@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200604112142.k3BLgafP004597@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1144828652.15058.33.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 14:42 -0700, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Author: notting > > Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-HTML-TableExtract/FC-5 > In directory cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv4580 > > Modified Files: > perl-HTML-TableExtract.spec > Log Message: > bump > > > > Index: perl-HTML-TableExtract.spec > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-HTML-TableExtract/FC-5/perl-HTML-TableExtract.spec,v > retrieving revision 1.1 > retrieving revision 1.2 > diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 > --- perl-HTML-TableExtract.spec 11 Apr 2006 17:16:36 -0000 1.1 > +++ perl-HTML-TableExtract.spec 11 Apr 2006 21:42:33 -0000 1.2 > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > Name: perl-HTML-TableExtract > Version: 2.07 > -Release: 2 > +Release: 1.fc5 Since the spec files for all branches are actually identical in all but release, you may find it easier to maintain them using the %{?dist} tag rather than hardcoding distribution names: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag Paul. From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Wed Apr 12 09:15:07 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 11:15:07 +0200 Subject: Tenable license on nessus plugins In-Reply-To: <3237e4410604111935s137f6c91qe019abf34b1bc3c@mail.gmail.com> References: <3ea997540604111714q4c8b411fw1a2177bbe8f76b56@mail.gmail.com> <3237e4410604111932o520ac976o9b675a3e5fea3543@mail.gmail.com> <3237e4410604111935s137f6c91qe019abf34b1bc3c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060412111507.7f2b87c3@alkaid.a.lan> On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:35:47 -0500 "Mike McGrath" wrote: > On second read: > -------------- > use any Plugins other than in conjunction with > Registered Nessus or NeWT Scanners obtained directly from > www.nessus.org or www.tenablesecurity.com to detect > vulnerabilities on your own system or network or on the system or > network > ----------------- > That's not good at all. Perhaps a request to upstream is needed for > special permission for use in Fedora? Seeing as the next version of > Nessus is closed source you might just get lucky. > > -Mike > Sorry for being so quiet on this... lots of stuff going on here atm... I will see if I can get a statement in the next couple of days... - Andreas -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 173 5803043 | mail preferred -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: not available URL: From pmatilai at laiskiainen.org Wed Apr 12 09:35:14 2006 From: pmatilai at laiskiainen.org (Panu Matilainen) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 02:35:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Seeking new maintainer for apt and synaptic In-Reply-To: <443C067D.7000206@hhs.nl> References: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> <443C067D.7000206@hhs.nl> Message-ID: On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Hans de Goede wrote: > > Axel Thimm wrote: >> Hi, >> >> apt/synaptic have been orphaned since about half a year, anyone >> objecting in me taking over? >> > > Not really an objection, but do we want to confuse users with an extra way to > manage repositories. Also APT AFAIK still doesn't handle multi-lib. Like others have pointed out, the lorg releases do support multilib and lorg3-rc1 in extras-development also supports the new repodata format. Nobody wants to see the "depsolver wars" rehashed, and there's really nothing to rehash. People have different needs and like to use the tool that suits their needs best, shrug. > Is there any significant reason to use apt instead of yum? Don't get me wrong > choice usually is good, but this is a very fundamental piece of the distro, > and becoming so more and more. We also have only one kernel, C-library and > X-server and with good reasons. There are various reasons people want to use apt. To name a few: - If you're in mixed .deb vs .rpm environment having the same tool for both types of systems can be useful. - Apt does some things that yum doesn't (and this is of course true the other way around as well), and will not, according to Seth, support. Remember all people on fedora-devel complaining about rawhide brokenness on a given day and having to figure out long --exclude= command lines for yum to work around them? Apt does that automatically by holding back updates to packages with broken dependencies, for example. - There are people who like apt because of it's insane configurability. - It works across entire rpm release line (3.0.5-4.4.5 at least), current yum and smart do not (and no, yum 1.0 doesn't quite cut it :) - Speed of dependency resolution (apt doesn't download any additional headers for example) Oh and before more people ask: me hacking apt-rpm again does NOT mean I've stopped (or planning to do so) working on yum+yum-utils. - Panu - From jspaleta at gmail.com Wed Apr 12 14:38:46 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 10:38:46 -0400 Subject: Seeking new maintainer for apt and synaptic In-Reply-To: References: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> <443C067D.7000206@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <604aa7910604120738o67996d4ao472a3159a09dec33@mail.gmail.com> On 4/12/06, Panu Matilainen wrote: > People have different needs and like to use the tool > that suits their needs best, shrug. Maybe I should pull grab out of the dustbin and submit it for review. There isn't nearly enough perl based packages in Extras. -jef From pmatilai at laiskiainen.org Wed Apr 12 15:04:51 2006 From: pmatilai at laiskiainen.org (Panu Matilainen) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 18:04:51 +0300 Subject: Seeking new maintainer for apt and synaptic In-Reply-To: <604aa7910604120738o67996d4ao472a3159a09dec33@mail.gmail.com> References: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> <443C067D.7000206@hhs.nl> <604aa7910604120738o67996d4ao472a3159a09dec33@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1144854291.2437.10.camel@dhcppc0> On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 10:38 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 4/12/06, Panu Matilainen wrote: > > People have different needs and like to use the tool > > that suits their needs best, shrug. > > Maybe I should pull grab out of the dustbin and submit it for review. > There isn't nearly enough perl based packages in Extras. So why don't you? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CoreVsExtras says "Fedora Extras is intended to be a maximal set of Open Source software for use with Core." "Maximal set of open source software" doesn't question the usefulness of the software for any particular purpose or to any particular user. - Panu - From thias at spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.egg.and.spam.freshrpms.net Wed Apr 12 16:12:52 2006 From: thias at spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.egg.and.spam.freshrpms.net (Matthias Saou) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 18:12:52 +0200 Subject: RRDtool is in need of attention Message-ID: <20060412181252.4f388242@python2> Hi, Lately, I haven't been using rrdtool as intensively as I used to, so my interest has gotten lower and the lack of "easy real world testing" I used to do has kept me from updating the package in a (way too) long while. If anyone uses rrdtool actively and wants to take over maintainership, I'd be more than welcome to pass it on! Current open bugzilla entries : * Upgrade request rrdtool to 1.2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167904 * rrdtool 1.0.50 has been released https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184003 * Please rebuild the package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185909 What had kept me from updating to 1.2.x was the initial lack of PHP module, which would have introduced a regression. From what I've been told, there is now a working separate PHP module that could easily be included in Extras at the same time RRDtool gets updated to 1.2.x. Matthias -- Clean custom Red Hat Linux rpm packages : http://freshrpms.net/ Fedora Core release 5 (Bordeaux) - Linux kernel 2.6.16-1.2080_FC5 Load : 0.89 0.96 0.93 From mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 12 16:48:06 2006 From: mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org (Mike McGrath) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 11:48:06 -0500 Subject: RRDtool is in need of attention In-Reply-To: <20060412181252.4f388242@python2> References: <20060412181252.4f388242@python2> Message-ID: <443D2F46.4080500@fedoraproject.org> Matthias Saou wrote: > Hi, > > Lately, I haven't been using rrdtool as intensively as I used to, so my > interest has gotten lower and the lack of "easy real world testing" I used > to do has kept me from updating the package in a (way too) long while. > > If anyone uses rrdtool actively and wants to take over maintainership, I'd > be more than welcome to pass it on! > > Current open bugzilla entries : > * Upgrade request rrdtool to 1.2 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167904 > * rrdtool 1.0.50 has been released > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184003 > * Please rebuild the package > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185909 > > What had kept me from updating to 1.2.x was the initial lack of PHP > module, which would have introduced a regression. From what I've been > told, there is now a working separate PHP module that could easily be > included in Extras at the same time RRDtool gets updated to 1.2.x. > > Matthias > > I'd love to take it, I use it in cacti and have been wondering why it hasn't been upgraded :-D -Mike From jspaleta at gmail.com Wed Apr 12 16:50:16 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 12:50:16 -0400 Subject: Seeking new maintainer for apt and synaptic In-Reply-To: <1144854291.2437.10.camel@dhcppc0> References: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> <443C067D.7000206@hhs.nl> <604aa7910604120738o67996d4ao472a3159a09dec33@mail.gmail.com> <1144854291.2437.10.camel@dhcppc0> Message-ID: <604aa7910604120950s467e6e1ey25d1c023c8e2f0d6@mail.gmail.com> On 4/12/06, Panu Matilainen wrote: > So why don't you? Because its written in perl! -jef From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 16:55:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 12:55:05 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604121655.k3CGt5ZS017135@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 mchouque at free.fr changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mchouque at free.fr ------- Additional Comments From mchouque at free.fr 2006-04-12 12:54 EST ------- It would also be nice to include the extra sounds. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 17:00:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:00:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604121700.k3CH0hgl018495@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 ------- Additional Comments From mchouque at free.fr 2006-04-12 13:00 EST ------- Or rather in a separate rpm (I see that Matthias packages them in asterisk-sounds). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 17:03:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:03:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187932] Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604121703.k3CH3C5V019168@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187932 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-12 13:03 EST ------- Therre are still some rpmlint warning about executable files that shouldnt be executable. I tracked down the issues. One is with the install of files, you should add -m644 to the install call. The other is with the find. Now the *.txt and *.xml aren't taken into accound anymore... This is fixed with: find . \(-name \*.txt -o -name \*.xml -o -name \*.'[ch]*' \) -print0 Also \*.'[ch]*' finds a lot of files, including with *.cmake, .cvsignore, *.ctest, *.h.in, *.check_cache, *.cg, *.html, *.cur. But it needs to find *.c *.h *.hxx *.cxx *.cpp *.xml *.txt, so it may be right to catch more. Indeed everything but scripts and directories should be chmod -x, so advise. Please fix those and I believe it would be right. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 17:04:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:04:42 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604121704.k3CH4ga8019501@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 ------- Additional Comments From matthias at rpmforge.net 2006-04-12 13:04 EST ------- Keep in mind that some sound files are present in both the asterisk and asterisk-sounds sources, so you also get some "nice" conflicts, which even happen to change every once in a while (files added here, removed there...). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 17:10:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:10:44 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604121710.k3CHAiWQ020483@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-04-12 13:10 EST ------- (In reply to comment #23) > Keep in mind that some sound files are present in both the asterisk and > asterisk-sounds sources, so you also get some "nice" conflicts, which even > happen to change every once in a while (files added here, removed there...). The conflicting sounds were removed from the SVN repo a while back, but there hasn't been a new release of the tarball. There are also some French prompts available in the SVN repository which would be good to have packaged at some time. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 17:16:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:16:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604121716.k3CHGuk3021933@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-04-12 13:16 EST ------- (In reply to comment #22) > Or rather in a separate rpm (I see that Matthias packages them in asterisk-sounds). A separate source RPM would be good because then the RPM that contains the sounds can be a noarch package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 17:36:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:36:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188542] Review Request: hylafax In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604121736.k3CHa3Lq026726@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hylafax https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188542 ------- Additional Comments From faxguy at howardsilvan.com 2006-04-12 13:36 EST ------- Okay, I've returned the ldconfig to their previous places and have updated those files listed above. If fedora-usermgmt is optional then I opt to take the easier route and ignore it. :-) As for capi4hylafax - I've never used it myself. I'm a developer for HylaFAX and IAXmodem, but I've never had occassion to use or work with capi4hylafax at all. So, unfortunately I cannot promise anything with respect to capi4hylafax, but hopefully once HylaFAX is in Fedora Extras someone else can take that next step for CAPI users. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 17:42:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:42:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188738] New: Review Request: pycrypto - a python cryptography library Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188738 Summary: Review Request: pycrypto - a python cryptography library Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: shahms at shahms.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec URL: http://shahms.mesd.k12.or.us/packages/pycrypto.spec SRPM URL: http://shahms.mesd.k12.or.us/packages/pycrypto-2.0.1-2.src.rpm Description: A library of cryptography algorithms and protocols for use from Python. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 17:42:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:42:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188737] New: Review Request: pycrypto Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188737 Summary: Review Request: pycrypto Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: shahms at shahms.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec URL: http://shahms.mesd.k12.or.us/packages/pycrypto.spec SRPM URL: http://shahms.mesd.k12.or.us/packages/pycrypto-2.0.1-2.src.rpm Description: A library of cryptography algorithms and protocols for use from Python. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 17:46:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:46:55 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188737] Review Request: pycrypto In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604121746.k3CHktej029381@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pycrypto https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188737 jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: pycrypto |Review Request: pycrypto ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-04-12 13:46 EST ------- Isn't this the same as the python-crypto package? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 17:47:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:47:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188738] Review Request: pycrypto - a python cryptography library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604121747.k3CHlCWP029486@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pycrypto - a python cryptography library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188738 jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-04-12 13:46 EST ------- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 188737 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 17:47:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:47:33 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188737] Review Request: pycrypto In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604121747.k3CHlXpC029620@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pycrypto https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188737 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-04-12 13:47 EST ------- *** Bug 188738 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 17:51:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:51:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188740] New: Review Request: python-paramiko - a SSH2 protocol library for python Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188740 Summary: Review Request: python-paramiko - a SSH2 protocol library for python Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info ReportedBy: shahms at shahms.com QAContact: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Spec URL: http://shahms.mesd.k12.or.us/packages/python-paramiko.spec SRPM URL: http://shahms.mesd.k12.or.us/packages/python-paramiko-1.5.3-1.src.rpm Description: Paramiko (a combination of the esperanto words for "paranoid" and "friend") is a module for python 2.3 or greater that implements the SSH2 protocol for secure (encrypted and authenticated) connections to remote machines. Unlike SSL (aka TLS), the SSH2 protocol does not require heirarchical certificates signed by a powerful central authority. You may know SSH2 as the protocol that replaced telnet and rsh for secure access to remote shells, but the protocol also includes the ability to open arbitrary channels to remote services across an encrypted tunnel. (This is how sftp works, for example.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 17:53:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:53:58 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604121753.k3CHrwLb030982@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 ------- Additional Comments From mchouque at free.fr 2006-04-12 13:53 EST ------- (In reply to comment #24) > (In reply to comment #23) > > Keep in mind that some sound files are present in both the asterisk and > > asterisk-sounds sources, so you also get some "nice" conflicts, which even > > happen to change every once in a while (files added here, removed there...). > > The conflicting sounds were removed from the SVN repo a while back, but there > hasn't been a new release of the tarball. There are also some French prompts > available in the SVN repository which would be good to have packaged at some time. I've built rpms using Matthias spec files for asterisk (1.2.6) and asterisk-sounds (1.2.1) and there aren't any conflicting files. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 17:56:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:56:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188737] Review Request: pycrypto In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604121756.k3CHuCmW031591@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pycrypto https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188737 shahms at shahms.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NOTABUG ------- Additional Comments From shahms at shahms.com 2006-04-12 13:56 EST ------- Yes it is, I'm closing it. I looked for pycrypto because that seemed the correct name according to the package naming guidelines. My mistake. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From gemi at bluewin.ch Wed Apr 12 18:12:40 2006 From: gemi at bluewin.ch (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard?= Milmeister) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 20:12:40 +0200 Subject: Providing information about apps on fedora wiki Message-ID: <1144865561.4440.2.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> I would like to provide some directions to make Maple and Mathematica run in presence of SELinux on Fedora Wiki. Where should I do that? Hasn't there been some talk to make a category for specific packages, where also maintainers of Extras packages can provide some informations on their packages? -- G?rard Milmeister Langackerstrasse 49 CH-8057 Z?rich From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 18:15:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 14:15:06 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188740] Review Request: python-paramiko - a SSH2 protocol library for python In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604121815.k3CIF6S9004819@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-paramiko - a SSH2 protocol library for python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188740 jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-04-12 14:14 EST ------- I'll have a full review in a bit... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 12 18:29:02 2006 From: mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org (Mike McGrath) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:29:02 -0500 Subject: Providing information about apps on fedora wiki In-Reply-To: <1144865561.4440.2.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> References: <1144865561.4440.2.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: <443D46EE.2010906@fedoraproject.org> I believe this was discussed a while back. Are you talking about putting the same stuff up there thats in the README.Fedora file thats included with your package? -Mike G?rard Milmeister wrote: > I would like to provide some directions to make Maple > and Mathematica run in presence of SELinux on Fedora Wiki. > Where should I do that? Hasn't there been some talk to make > a category for specific packages, where also maintainers of > Extras packages can provide some informations on their > packages? > From gemi at bluewin.ch Wed Apr 12 18:44:51 2006 From: gemi at bluewin.ch (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard?= Milmeister) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 20:44:51 +0200 Subject: Providing information about apps on fedora wiki In-Reply-To: <443D46EE.2010906@fedoraproject.org> References: <1144865561.4440.2.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> <443D46EE.2010906@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1144867492.5338.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 13:29 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > I believe this was discussed a while back. Are you talking about > putting the same stuff up there thats in the README.Fedora file thats > included with your package? > > -Mike Maybe that too, but mainly general tips to work with the package, for example interoperation with other packages, etc. However here I thought about how to make work proprietary software like Maple and Mathematica as I mentioned. For example, SELinux needs slight configuration changes using semanage, or Mathematica needs some files in /usr/X11R6 that are no longer present, etc. -- G?rard Milmeister Langackerstrasse 49 CH-8057 Z?rich From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 18:58:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 14:58:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188601] Review Request: ltsp-utils In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604121858.k3CIwvKt017736@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ltsp-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188601 fedora at soeterbroek.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NOTABUG ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-04-12 14:58 EST ------- Spec URL: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/ltsp-utils/ltsp-utils.spec SRPM URL: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/ltsp-utils/ltsp-utils-0.22-2.src.rpm * Wed Apr 12 2006 Joost Soeterbroek - 0.22-2 - added Requires for perl(LWP), perl(URI), perl(Digest::MD5), perl(Term::Cap) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 12 19:45:50 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 15:45:50 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060412194550.EB23A8001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 4 conserver-8.1.14-1.fc3 link-grammar-4.2.2-1.fc3 oddjob-0.25-5 openvpn-2.0.7-1.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 12 19:46:42 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 15:46:42 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060412194642.1D4D18001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 13 libsexy-0.1.8-1.fc4 link-grammar-4.2.2-1.fc4 monotone-0.26-1.fc4 ntl-5.4-2.fc4 oddjob-0.25-6 openvpn-2.0.7-1.fc4 perl-Finance-Quote-1.11-2.fc4 perl-Gtk2-1.121-1.fc4 perl-HTML-TableExtract-2.07-1.fc4 python-fpconst-0.7.2-1.fc4 qps-1.9.15-1.fc4 seamonkey-1.0-11.fc4.1 xchat-gnome-0.6-6.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 12 19:47:22 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 15:47:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060412194722.72D988001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 15 gdesklets-0.35.3-7.fc5 libebml-0.7.7-1.fc5 link-grammar-4.2.2-1.fc5 monotone-0.26-1.fc5 ntl-5.4-2.fc5 oddjob-0.25-7 openvpn-2.1-0.9.beta13.fc5 perl-DBD-SQLite-1.12-1.fc5 perl-Finance-Quote-1.11-2.fc5 perl-Gtk2-1.121-1.fc5 perl-HTML-TableExtract-2.07-1.fc5 perl-Test-MockObject-1.05-1.fc5 python-fpconst-0.7.2-1.fc5 qps-1.9.15-1.fc5 xosd-2.2.14-6.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 12 19:49:45 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 15:49:45 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060412194945.CF44D8001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 16 Macaulay2-0.9.8-0.3.cvs20060327.fc6 NetworkManager-vpnc-0.6.0-2 cernlib-2005-15.fc6.1 gdesklets-0.35.3-4.fc6 libebml-0.7.7-1.fc6 link-grammar-4.2.2-1.fc6 monotone-0.26-1.fc6 oddjob-0.25-8 openvpn-2.1-0.9.beta13.fc6 perl-DBD-SQLite-1.12-1.fc6 perl-Gtk2-1.121-1.fc6 perl-Test-MockObject-1.05-1.fc6 python-fpconst-0.7.2-1.fc6 qgo-1.5r1-1.fc6 qps-1.9.15-1.fc6 xosd-2.2.14-6.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 19:52:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 15:52:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188601] Review Request: ltsp-utils In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604121952.k3CJqkLA032194@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ltsp-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188601 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-04-12 15:52 EST ------- (In reply to comment #8) > * Wed Apr 12 2006 Joost Soeterbroek - 0.22-2 > - added Requires for perl(LWP), perl(URI), perl(Digest::MD5), perl(Term::Cap) The addition of the above deps means that the following can be removed: Requires: perl-libwww-perl Requires: perl-URI -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 20:08:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 16:08:05 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188601] Review Request: ltsp-utils In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604122008.k3CK85pF003382@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ltsp-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188601 ------- Additional Comments From fedora at soeterbroek.com 2006-04-12 16:08 EST ------- Spec URL: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/ltsp-utils/ltsp-utils.spec SRPM URL: http://www.soeterbroek.com/linux/fedora/extras/ltsp-utils/ltsp-utils-0.22-3.src.rpm * Wed Apr 12 2006 Joost Soeterbroek - 0.22-3 - removed Requires for perl-libwww-perl, perl-URI -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From kaboom at oobleck.net Wed Apr 12 20:15:34 2006 From: kaboom at oobleck.net (Chris Ricker) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 16:15:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: RRDtool is in need of attention In-Reply-To: <20060412181252.4f388242@python2> References: <20060412181252.4f388242@python2> Message-ID: On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Matthias Saou wrote: > Lately, I haven't been using rrdtool as intensively as I used to, so my > interest has gotten lower and the lack of "easy real world testing" I used > to do has kept me from updating the package in a (way too) long while. > > If anyone uses rrdtool actively and wants to take over maintainership, I'd > be more than welcome to pass it on! > > Current open bugzilla entries : > * Upgrade request rrdtool to 1.2 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167904 > * rrdtool 1.0.50 has been released > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184003 > * Please rebuild the package > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185909 > > What had kept me from updating to 1.2.x was the initial lack of PHP > module, which would have introduced a regression. From what I've been > told, there is now a working separate PHP module that could easily be > included in Extras at the same time RRDtool gets updated to 1.2.x. I use it a lot and don't mind maintaining it Looks like cacti and munin are the two packages already in Extras which use it. Do they both work with 1.2? later, chris From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 20:29:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 16:29:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179237] Review Request: swaks - A command-line SMTP transaction tester In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604122029.k3CKTGic008736@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: swaks - A command-line SMTP transaction tester https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179237 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-12 16:29 EST ------- In case it wasn't clear, I addressed all five of your concerns with the updated package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 20:32:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 16:32:01 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188601] Review Request: ltsp-utils In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604122032.k3CKW1oa009561@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ltsp-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188601 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-04-12 16:31 EST ------- I meant that contacting Eric Harrison to be sure this doesn't conflict was a blocker. That is now resolved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From kevin-fedora-extras at scrye.com Wed Apr 12 20:42:49 2006 From: kevin-fedora-extras at scrye.com (Kevin Fenzi) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 14:42:49 -0600 (MDT) Subject: RRDtool is in need of attention References: <20060412181252.4f388242@python2> Message-ID: <20060412.144249.891065190.kevin@scrye.com> >>>>> "Chris" == Chris Ricker writes: Chris> On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Matthias Saou wrote: >> Lately, I haven't been using rrdtool as intensively as I used to, >> so my interest has gotten lower and the lack of "easy real world >> testing" I used to do has kept me from updating the package in a >> (way too) long while. >> >> If anyone uses rrdtool actively and wants to take over >> maintainership, I'd be more than welcome to pass it on! >> >> Current open bugzilla entries : * Upgrade request rrdtool to 1.2 >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167904 * >> rrdtool 1.0.50 has been released >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184003 * >> Please rebuild the package >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185909 >> >> What had kept me from updating to 1.2.x was the initial lack of PHP >> module, which would have introduced a regression. From what I've >> been told, there is now a working separate PHP module that could >> easily be included in Extras at the same time RRDtool gets updated >> to 1.2.x. Chris> I use it a lot and don't mind maintaining it Chris> Looks like cacti and munin are the two packages already in Chris> Extras which use it. Do they both work with 1.2? I think munin does. I haven't tested it, but from what I have read, it should work with it fine. I can try and test it out at some point here. If you can make a 1.2.x rrdtool test package that would be helpfull. ;) Chris> later, chris kevin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 20:45:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 16:45:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188740] Review Request: python-paramiko - a SSH2 protocol library for python In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604122045.k3CKjV60015931@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-paramiko - a SSH2 protocol library for python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188740 jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-04-12 16:45 EST ------- Here's the full review: - MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the review. OK (no output) - MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK - MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec OK - MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. OK - MUST: The package must be licensed with an open-source compatible license and meet other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. OK (LGPL) - 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 spec file must be written in American English. OK - MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. If the reviewer is unable to read the spec file, it will be impossible to perform a review. Fedora Extras is not the place for entries into the Obfuscated Code Contest ([WWW] http://www.ioccc.org/). OK - MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. OK - MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. OK - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch needs to have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number should then be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line. New packages will not have bugzilla entries during the review process, so they should put this description in the comment until the package is approved, then file the bugzilla entry, and replace the long explanation with the bug number. The bug should be marked as blocking one (or more) of the following bugs to simplify tracking such issues: [WWW] FE-ExcludeArch-x86, [WWW] FE-ExcludeArch-x64, [WWW] FE-ExcludeArch-ppc OK - MUST: A package must not contain any BuildRequires that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. OK - MUST: All other Build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. OK - MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden. OK (no locale-specific content in the package) - MUST: If the package contains shared library files located in the dynamic linker's default paths, that package must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. If the package has multiple subpackages with libraries, each subpackage should also have a %post/%postun section that calls /sbin/ldconfig. An example of the correct syntax for this is: %post -p /sbin/ldconfig %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig OK (no shared library files) - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker. OK (not relocatable) - MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory. The exception to this are directories listed explicitly in the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard ([WWW] http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html), as it is safe to assume that those directories exist. OK - MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. OK - MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a %defattr(...) line. OK - MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). OK - MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines. OK - MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. This is described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines. OK - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -docs subpackage. (The definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity) OK - MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. OK - MUST: Header files or static libraries must be in a -devel package. OK - MUST: Files used by pkgconfig (.pc files) must be in a -devel package. OK - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. OK - MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. OK - MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be removed in the spec. OK - MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. This is described in detail in the desktop files section of Packaging Guidelines. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation. OK - MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This means, for example, that no package in Fedora Extras should ever share ownership with any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another package owns, then please present that at package review time. OK - SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. OK - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. OK - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. OK - SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. OK (noarch rpm) - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. OK - SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity. OK (no scriptlets) - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. OK (no subpackages) APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 20:48:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 16:48:15 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187913] Review Request: mysql-query-browser In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604122048.k3CKmFhT017631@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mysql-query-browser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187913 michel.salim at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |michel.salim at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From michel.salim at gmail.com 2006-04-12 16:48 EST ------- It works fine for me on i386, but under x86_64, attempting to actually use a database causes a segfault: /usr/bin/mysql-query-browser: line 20: 16829 Segmentation fault $PRG-bin -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From wtogami at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 21:04:16 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 17:04:16 -0400 Subject: Fedora Package Reviews List Message-ID: <443D6B50.8020305@redhat.com> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review Bug Traffic of Package Reviews for the Fedora Distribution are delivered to this read-only list. For now Fedora Core package reviews are set to this list. I will be migrating Fedora Extras package reviews sometime soon. "Soon" by Fedora standards could be any year now. =) Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 21:56:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 17:56:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187913] Review Request: mysql-query-browser In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604122156.k3CLu0sP000815@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mysql-query-browser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187913 ------- Additional Comments From dennis at ausil.us 2006-04-12 17:55 EST ------- hmm kinda strange. i have run succesfully on ppc, x86 and x86_64 can you please get me a strace of when you load the program. I may be slow to reply as im in Australia on vacation. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 22:14:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 18:14:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 180300] Review Request: ccrtp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604122214.k3CMEdB4004886@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ccrtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180300 ------- Additional Comments From yan.morin at gmail.com 2006-04-12 18:14 EST ------- Same bug is reported here: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1310079&group_id=136955&atid=737291 The last ccrtp package is 1.3.7 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 22:32:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 18:32:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 180300] Review Request: ccrtp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604122232.k3CMWPDS008286@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ccrtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180300 ------- Additional Comments From yan.morin at gmail.com 2006-04-12 18:32 EST ------- Debian patch this issue in http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/main/libc/libccrtp/libccrtp_1.3.6-1.diff.gz like this: +diff -ur ccrtp-1.3.1/src/queue.cpp ccrtp-1.3.1.patched/src/queue.cpp +--- ccrtp-1.3.1/src/queue.cpp 2005-03-24 14:14:18.000000000 +0100 ++++ ccrtp-1.3.1.patched/src/queue.cpp 2005-06-07 17:44:57.578322928 +0200 +@@ -452,7 +452,7 @@ + uint8 array[1]; + struct { + timeval time; +- uint32 address; ++ void* address; + uint8 cname[10]; + } data; + } message; +@@ -467,7 +467,7 @@ + message.array[0] = + static_cast(message.data.time.tv_sec * + message.data.time.tv_usec); +- message.data.address = (uint32)(&message); ++ message.data.address = (void*)(&message); + memcpy(message.data.cname, + defaultApplication().getSDESItem(SDESItemTypeCNAME).c_str(),10); + 1.3.7 version seems to have void* address; but not the cast: message.data.address = (void*)(&message); -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 22:47:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 18:47:05 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187932] Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604122247.k3CMl50F010842@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187932 ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-04-12 18:47 EST ------- http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/paraview.spec http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/paraview-2.4.3-5.src.rpm Just need the spec this time. Need to move the find to %install - cmake build process must muck with stuff is my only guess. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 23:05:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 19:05:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188478] Review Request: fxload-2002_04_11.spec In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604122305.k3CN5N6E013941@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fxload-2002_04_11.spec https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188478 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-04-12 19:05 EST ------- - Source0 should be a full URL - Macros should be used instead of hard-coded paths -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 12 23:52:15 2006 From: mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org (Mike McGrath) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 18:52:15 -0500 Subject: RRDtool is in need of attention In-Reply-To: <20060412.144249.891065190.kevin@scrye.com> References: <20060412181252.4f388242@python2> <20060412.144249.891065190.kevin@scrye.com> Message-ID: <3237e4410604121652vbea2221sa92631670c3d67ef@mail.gmail.com> > Chris> I use it a lot and don't mind maintaining it > > Chris> Looks like cacti and munin are the two packages already in > Chris> Extras which use it. Do they both work with 1.2? > > I think munin does. I haven't tested it, but from what I have read, it > should work with it fine. I can try and test it out at some point > here. If you can make a 1.2.x rrdtool test package that would be > helpfull. ;) > > Chris> later, chris > > kevin > I know cacti does without issue. -Mike From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 23:52:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 19:52:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188478] Review Request: fxload-2002_04_11.spec In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604122352.k3CNqcVk022133@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fxload-2002_04_11.spec https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188478 ------- Additional Comments From ndbecker2 at verizon.net 2006-04-12 19:52 EST ------- Thanks. What is the macro for /sbin? I can't seem to find it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 12 23:56:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 19:56:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604122356.k3CNuvUE022718@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-04-12 19:56 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2.7-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2.7-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 00:43:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 20:43:45 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188542] Review Request: hylafax In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604130043.k3D0hjod030481@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hylafax https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188542 ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-04-12 20:43 EST ------- I was thinking about being that "somebody eelse", but that CAPI stuff is so horribly broken sometimes I don't dare maintaining it. ;) REVIEW: > $ md5sum hylafax-4.2.5.5-1.src.rpm > 373044fd59ff14554ccda17b2fcca028 hylafax-4.2.5.5-1.src.rpm Good - MUST Items - package and specfile naming according to guidelines - package meets guidelines - license ok - license field in spec matches actual license - license included in source and correctly installed in %doc - spec written in American English - spec is legible - BuildRequires ok, no duplicates and none of the listed exceptions - no locales to worry about - ldconfig correctly called for shared libs in %post and %postun - relocatable - package own all directories it creates - packages doesn't own files or directories already owned by other packages - %files section ok, no duplicates - permissions ok, correct %defattr - clean section present and ok - macro usage consistent - code, not content - no large docs - %doc section ok, docs don't affect runtime - no headers, static libs or pkgconfigs to worry about - no libtool archives Good - SHOULD Items - package builds im mock (Core 5 i386) - package seems to work as usual, nevertheless I can't really test I here right now in absence of a modem - scriptlets match examples from wiki - package uses disttag Needswork - MUST Items - rpmlint errors and warnings: > $ rpmlint hylafax-4.2.5.5-1.fc5.src.rpm | sort > E: hylafax no-%clean-section > This is "[ "$RPM_BUILD_ROOT" != "/" ] && rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT" confusing rpmlint. I suggest you use the regular "rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT" (don't worry about the buildhosts ;)) or ignore this message, the %clean section in your spec is valid. > $ rpmlint hylafax-4.2.5.5-1.fc5.i386.rpm | sort > E: hylafax executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/cron.daily/hylafax > E: hylafax executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/cron.hourly/hylafax > safe to ignore, but IMO the cronjobs shouldn't be "noreplace" since they don't store any configuration. > E: hylafax executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/hylafax > the initscript should not be a config file. It shouldn't be "noreplace" ether, since it won't be replaced on updates then. > E: hylafax explicit-lib-dependency libtiff > remove libtiff from Requires, rpm will find that dependency itself > E: hylafax invalid-soname /usr/lib/libfaxserver.so.4.2.5.5 libfaxserver.so > E: hylafax invalid-soname /usr/lib/libfaxutil.so.4.2.5.5 libfaxutil.so > safe to ignore in our case > E: hylafax non-executable-script /var/spool/hylafax/bin/notify.awk 0444 > is this on purpose? > E: hylafax non-readable /var/spool/hylafax/etc/hosts.hfaxd 0600 > due to ownership of uucp, safe to ignore > E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/archive 0700 > E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/docq 0700 > E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/doneq 0700 > E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/pollq 0700 > E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/sendq 0700 > E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/tmp 0700 > these are ok, but there are other dirs o worry about. Take a look at /var/spool/hylafax or /var/spool/hylafax/bin: These should be owned by root. IMO all dirs should be owned by root as long as they don't need to be writable by uucp or this doesn't affect the runtime of the program. > E: hylafax script-without-shellbang /usr/sbin/faxsetup.linux > E: hylafax script-without-shellbang /var/spool/hylafax/bin/dictionary > These files should have start with something like "#! /bin/bash". Fix this upstream ;-) > W: hylafax devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfaxserver.so > W: hylafax devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfaxutil.so > Usually these files should go into a seperate hylafax-devel package. From the review guidlines: "MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package." But I doubt there's much sense rolling a package with only two symlinks inside. > W: hylafax non-conffile-in-etc /etc/hylafax/faxcover_example_sgi.ps > Safe to ignore. > W: hylafax no-version-in-last-changelog > append "- -" to every changelog entry, e.g. * Tue Apr 11 2006 Lee Howard - 4.2.5.5-1 > W: hylafax service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/hylafax > Please change "# chkconfig: 345 95 5" to "# chkconfig: - 95 5" in hylafax.rh.init. see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ScriptletSnippets#head-55b46ef483e6a08c24a8fc3b0b7e2ef7bfb84efd - License: You can change the license back to "BSD-Style" or "BSD like" or something like that, I have seen other packages even in Core with that too. To me the COPYRIGHT looks basically BSD, but I leave it up to you. Just make sure that the COPYRIGHT is correctly included in %doc. - Source does not match upstream: the one included in your rpm > c4de725b0a2721df02880bf77809d3bd hylafax-4.2.5.5.tar.gz taken from the URL in Source0 > 6d9886532cbf2c21675ecb802b5ef115 ../downloads/hylafax-4.2.5.5.tar.gz > The source always must match with Source0 from the spec. - package does compile on current Core 5, I'm attaching a log. Nevertheless it builds in Core 5 mock. NEEDSWORK -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 01:23:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 21:23:19 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188542] Review Request: hylafax In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604130123.k3D1NJI1004281@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hylafax https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188542 ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-04-12 21:23 EST ------- (In reply to comment #8) Please forget what I wrote about the cronjobs and the initscript and leave them as they are "%config(noreplace)". -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 02:12:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 22:12:33 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188775] New: Mass CC change s/fedora-extras-list/fedora-package-review/ Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188775 Summary: Mass CC change s/fedora-extras-list/fedora-package- review/ Product: Bugzilla Version: 2.18 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: bugzilla AssignedTo: dkl at redhat.com ReportedBy: wtogami at redhat.com QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Hi Dave, We need all bugs with CC of fedora-extras-list at redhat.com to be changed to CC fedora-package-review at redhat.com. We cannot do this by simply renaming the Bugzilla account, because fedora-package-review at redhat.com already has its own account. Can you please make this change directly to the database, so we can avoid tens of thousands of bugmail? http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review Note to everyone else, now is the time to subscribe to the new list if you want to continue to receive package review traffic. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 03:01:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 23:01:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187304] Review Request: echoping latency meassure tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604130301.k3D31Pcc021820@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: echoping latency meassure tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187304 ------- Additional Comments From andreas at bawue.net 2006-04-12 23:01 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) Thanks for the review. > So IMO this package should be released unter GPL since the GPL is more > restrictive than the "BSDish" license of openssl, right? The License-Tag in the .spec has always been GPL. The package is released under the GPL and not under the BSD license. The notice about the BSD license is in there as openssl is under the BSD license and the GPL software should receive a special permission to link against differently-free soft. Thus it's a non-issue. > Needswork: > - MUST: increase the release to -1, -0* is not a valid release (at least for a > stable version) fixed. > - MUST: directory ownership or permissions issues as %defattr is wrong: Change > "%defattr(-, root, root)" to "%defattr(-, root, root,-)" fixed. > - SHOULD: make macro usage more consistent: Please use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT instead > of %{buildroot} According to the guidelines, either one is okay. > - SHOULD: please change "%{__make} %{?_smp_mflags}" to "make %{?_smp_mflags}" > (just for simplicity, there's no need to need to cover make with a macro) > - SHOULD: remove the empty NEWS from %doc. > - SHOULD: I suggest you add DETAILS to the %doc section as well. > - SHOULD: Please change "Initial RPM release" to something like "Initial Fedora > Extras release". There are already some echoping rpms in 3rd party repos. All fixed. That should be all. If you could please do a final review. thx. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 03:02:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 23:02:13 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187304] Review Request: echoping latency meassure tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604130302.k3D32DJM021970@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: echoping latency meassure tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187304 ------- Additional Comments From andreas at bawue.net 2006-04-12 23:02 EST ------- The updated files are at http://home.bawue.de/~ixs/echoping/ http://home.bawue.de/~ixs/echoping/echoping.spec and http://home.bawue.de/~ixs/echoping/echoping-5.2.0-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 03:11:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 23:11:50 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187313] Review Request: perl-Authen-Radius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604130311.k3D3BoB9023624@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Authen-Radius https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187313 ------- Additional Comments From andreas at bawue.net 2006-04-12 23:11 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > BuildRequires: perl is not allowed; cpanspec should be able to generate a proper > specfile that doesn't do this. Removed. > There's no point in the BuildRequires: for perl(IO) and perl(Digest::MD5) as > these are part of base perl, but I don't supposed there's any harm in keeping > them. Removed. Thx for the review. Upgraded files are available at: http://home.bawue.de/~ixs/perl-Authen-Radius/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 03:27:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 23:27:05 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181831] Review Request: bitbake - Build Tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604130327.k3D3R5oe025721@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bitbake - Build Tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181831 ------- Additional Comments From andreas at bawue.net 2006-04-12 23:26 EST ------- Thx for the advice. .Spec is cleaned up and at http://home.bawue.de/~ixs/bitbake/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 03:49:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 23:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187313] Review Request: perl-Authen-Radius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604130349.k3D3nHNb029880@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Authen-Radius https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187313 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-12 23:49 EST ------- Looks good and builds properly. BTW, you left the perl(IO) and perl(Digest::MD5) buildreqs in, but this isn't a blocker. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 05:06:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 01:06:27 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188105] Review Request: torque In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604130506.k3D56RoO008956@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 ------- Additional Comments From garrick at usc.edu 2006-04-13 01:06 EST ------- http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~garrick/torque-2.1.0p0-0.5.200604071240cvs.src.rpm http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~garrick/torque.spec These fix the package release and include your rpath patch. I've done mock builds on FC4 and FC5 on i386. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 05:09:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 01:09:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188458] Review Request: libassetml - xml resource database library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604130509.k3D5937B009238@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libassetml - xml resource database library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188458 wart at kobold.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-13 01:08 EST ------- rpmlint output: E: libassetml-debuginfo script-without-shellbang /usr/src/debug/libassetml-1.2.1/src/tools/assetml-query.c MUST ==== * Package and spec named appropriately * GPL license ok. License file included in base package * Spec file legible and in Am. English * Source matches upstream 4b10fd0fb8e00a4fb526665413479516 libassetml-1.2.1.tar.gz * Compiles and builds on FC-4 i386, FC-4 x86_64 * No excessive or disallowed BR: * Locales handled correctly * ldconfig called in %post/%postun correctly * Not relocatable * No duplicate %files * build root cleaned in %clean and at start of %install * headers, pkgconfig files, and unsuffixed shlib in -devel * -devel requires base * No .la archives * No .desktop file necessary * Contains code, not content SHOULDFIX ========= * This isn't a blocker, but you can get rid of the rpmlint warning by removing the execute permission bit on the offending source file in %prep. * -devel owns %datadir/gnome. However, it seems that almost 20 other packages also claim to own this directory, so this isn't a blocker. Perhaps you can restrict the ownership to %datadir/gnome/help/%name? Since there are no blockers, consider this APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 13 06:04:25 2006 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 11:34:25 +0530 Subject: Providing information about apps on fedora wiki In-Reply-To: <1144865561.4440.2.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> References: <1144865561.4440.2.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: <1144908266.2294.325.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 20:12 +0200, G?rard Milmeister wrote: > I would like to provide some directions to make Maple > and Mathematica run in presence of SELinux on Fedora Wiki. > Where should I do that? Hasn't there been some talk to make > a category for specific packages, where also maintainers of > Extras packages can provide some informations on their > packages? > -- > G?rard Milmeister > Langackerstrasse 49 > CH-8057 Z?rich > Create a page http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ and add it to the category http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CategoryPackages Note that non-free packages are not covered in the wiki, http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/WikiEditing Might contact http://fedoraunity.org team for that. Rahul From pertusus at free.fr Thu Apr 13 08:54:30 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 10:54:30 +0200 Subject: package dropped from core wiki page not updated Message-ID: <20060413085430.GA7265@free.fr> Hello, Seems to me that the page http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackagesFC4 doesn't have all the packages listed on http://fedora.redhat.com/docs/release-notes/fc5/#sn-PackageChanges (minus the one imported, like w3c-libwww). I am not convinced that the page http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackagesFC4 is really usefull anyway as the packages should be taken based on the interest of packagers, the fact that they come from core isn't that important. It could be usefull for those who want to keep up using a package and for smooth upgrades using yum, to let them know that the package is likely to be problematic. But then it should better be on release notes and not there. -- Pat From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 09:36:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 05:36:58 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187932] Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604130936.k3D9awO3027429@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187932 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-13 05:36 EST ------- The lins don't work(In reply to comment #12) > http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/paraview.spec > http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/paraview-2.4.3-5.src.rpm The links don't work. > Just need the spec this time. Need to move the find to %install - cmake build > process must muck with stuff is my only guess. You mean it isn't fixed with the fixes I propose in Comment #11? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 10:08:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 06:08:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188400] Review Request: ssmtp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131008.k3DA8nL1001104@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ssmtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-13 06:08 EST ------- (In reply to comment #8) > Enrico: sendmail in Core has the man pages listed in Provides, this I why I have > included them. I don't think it is a good reason to include them. postfix and exim don't do that and they are certainly right, I would even say that it is a bug in sendmail package. No package should be requiring the man page, and it is confusing at best. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 11:03:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 07:03:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131103.k3DB3xTj011056@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 ------- Additional Comments From matthias at rpmforge.net 2006-04-13 07:03 EST ------- > I've built rpms using Matthias spec files for asterisk (1.2.6) and > asterisk-sounds (1.2.1) and there aren't any conflicting files. That's because all the conflicting sounds are %exclude'd in the asterisk-sounds package :-) But if this has now been fixed upstream, it's a good thing. And yes, the sounds make much more sense in a separate noarch rpm. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 13 11:40:03 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 11:40:03 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-13 Message-ID: <20060413114003.5186.88750@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch ====================================================================== package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 13 11:40:09 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 11:40:09 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-13 Message-ID: <20060413114009.5189.75897@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 13 11:40:16 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 11:40:16 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-13 Message-ID: <20060413114016.5193.51863@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 13 11:40:24 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 11:40:24 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-13 Message-ID: <20060413114024.5196.57978@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 Macaulay2-doc 0.9.2-22.fc6.i386 Macaulay2-emacs 0.9.2-17.fc4.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 smart 0.41-30.fc6.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc Macaulay2-doc 0.9.2-22.fc6.ppc Macaulay2-emacs 0.9.2-17.fc4.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc smart 0.41-30.fc6.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 smart 0.41-30.fc6.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== New report for: rdieter AT math.unl.edu package: Macaulay2-doc - 0.9.2-22.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: Macaulay2-emacs - 0.9.2-17.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: Macaulay2-doc - 0.9.2-22.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: Macaulay2-emacs - 0.9.2-17.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 ====================================================================== package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113()(64bit) package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0()(64bit) libglade gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 13 11:58:48 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:58:48 +0200 Subject: package dropped from core wiki page not updated In-Reply-To: <20060413085430.GA7265@free.fr> References: <20060413085430.GA7265@free.fr> Message-ID: <20060413135848.40163997.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 10:54:30 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > Hello, > > Seems to me that the page > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackagesFC4 > > doesn't have all the packages listed on > http://fedora.redhat.com/docs/release-notes/fc5/#sn-PackageChanges > (minus the one imported, like w3c-libwww). I am not convinced that > the page http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackagesFC4 > is really usefull anyway as the packages should be taken based on the > interest of packagers, the fact that they come from core isn't that > important. > > It could be usefull for those who want to keep up using a package > and for smooth upgrades using yum, to let them know that the package > is likely to be problematic. But then it should better be on release > notes and not there. What exactly are your complaints? And what improvements do you suggest? (That list of packages used to be included on the main OrphanedPackages page where it gets really old and annoying and uninteresting with every day FC-4 becomes older.) From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 12:01:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 08:01:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131201.k3DC1Ija021148@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 ------- Additional Comments From mchouque at free.fr 2006-04-13 08:00 EST ------- (In reply to comment #28) > That's because all the conflicting sounds are %exclude'd in the asterisk-sounds > package :-) But if this has now been fixed upstream, it's a good thing. And yes, > the sounds make much more sense in a separate noarch rpm. I confess I was too lazy to read the spec file (specially since it worked first hand)... ;-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 12:02:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 08:02:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187326] Review Request: smokeping - Network latency grapher In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131202.k3DC2OF1021388@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: smokeping - Network latency grapher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187326 Bug 187326 depends on bug 187313, which changed state. Bug 187313 Summary: Review Request: perl-Authen-Radius https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187313 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 13 13:13:44 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:13:44 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060413131344.258218001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 1 deskbar-applet-0.2-4.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 13 13:14:07 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:14:07 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060413131407.DFD218001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 5 abiword-2.4.4-2.fc4 plone-2.1.2-2.fc4 psi-0.10-4.fc4 xmms-cdread-0.14-10.fc4 xmms-cdread-0.14-11.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 13 13:14:46 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:14:46 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060413131446.C60F08001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 7 abiword-2.4.4-2.fc5 gparted-0.2.4-1.fc5 php-json-1.1.1-2.fc5 plone-2.1.2-2.fc5 psi-0.10-4.fc5 xmms-1.2.10-23.fc5 xmms-cdread-0.14-10.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 13 13:17:10 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:17:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060413131710.45B238001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 11 abiword-2.4.4-2.fc6 gajim-0.10-0.1.pre1.fc6 gnochm-0.9.7-3.fc6 gnochm-0.9.7-4.fc6 gparted-0.2.4-1.fc6 multitail-4.0.0-1.fc6 perl-Authen-Radius-0.12-2.fc6 php-json-1.2.1-1.fc6 plone-2.1.2-2.fc6 psi-0.10-4.fc6 xemacs-21.5.26-2.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 13:15:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:15:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187304] Review Request: echoping latency meassure tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131315.k3DDFdRR004757@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: echoping latency meassure tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187304 fedora.wickert at arcor.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-04-13 09:15 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > > - SHOULD: make macro usage more consistent: Please use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT instead > > of %{buildroot} > According to the guidelines, either one is okay. Yes, but %{buildroot} only should be used in %install (or %clean). If for some reason you need it in %configure you'll have to use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT there. Your macro usage would become inconsistent then, since you are using two different macros for the same thing. Nevertheless this isn't a blocker. md5sum echoping-5.2.0-1.src.rpm da157ff97fc7de0d9aabb6bd64027702 echoping-5.2.0-1.src.rpm The new package addresses all outstanding issues: - license ok - license included in source and correctly installed in %doc - license field in spec matches actual license - package versioning fixed - %defattr fixed - %doc section correct, no superflurious or empty files - changelog fixed - all other items are ok as described in comment #1 ACCEPTED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 13:30:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:30:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188293] Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131330.k3DDULCx007444@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-HTML-TableExtract https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188293 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-13 09:30 EST ------- This bug should be closed NEXTRELEASE if the package was checked in and the builds succeeded. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 13:48:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:48:40 -0400 Subject: [Bug 183889] Review Request: perl-Crypt-Primes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131348.k3DDmeHv012956@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Crypt-Primes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183889 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |tibbs at math.uh.edu OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-13 09:48 EST ------- * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: 041947b9645142615d687b89cf2e1a7b Crypt-Primes-0.50.tar.gz 041947b9645142615d687b89cf2e1a7b Crypt-Primes-0.50.tar.gz-srpm * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns no directories (besides %doc) * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * %check is present and all tests pass. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From pertusus at free.fr Thu Apr 13 14:09:56 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 16:09:56 +0200 Subject: package dropped from core wiki page not updated In-Reply-To: <20060413135848.40163997.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060413085430.GA7265@free.fr> <20060413135848.40163997.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060413140956.GD7265@free.fr> > What exactly are your complaints? And what improvements do you suggest? I think that the should either be removed entirely or kept up to date by adding new packages dropped from core and not yet imported into extras. Currently it is misleading. Maybe an even better solution would be to generate automatically that page similarly than what is done for the extras packages moved to core. I'll see what I can do. -- Pat From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 14:34:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 10:34:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 183888] Review Request: perl-Crypt-RSA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131434.k3DEYqG7022606@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Crypt-RSA https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183888 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |tibbs at math.uh.edu OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-13 10:34 EST ------- I'm keeping a local repo with the dependency chain in it so that I can do reviews of these; I can't see anything that would keep Math::Pari from being approved so I'm just working on the assumption that it will eventually make its way into Extras. Issues: W: perl-Crypt-RSA file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/man3/Crypt::RSA.3pm.gz This is due to a single accented 'e' in the POD. "iconv -f iso-8859-1 -t utf-8" should fix it up. Artistic license is included, but not GPL. Not a blocker, but upstream should probably be whacked. I'm not sure what to do with the two files in extradocs. One of them is referenced from the main manpage, but it also references an interoperability table which doesn't seem to be included. Otherwise it looks clean. Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and conforms to the Perl template. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: 3fd02d3d9e398e26848a0d49bd3b8ccd Crypt-RSA-1.57.tar.gz 3fd02d3d9e398e26848a0d49bd3b8ccd Crypt-RSA-1.57.tar.gz-srpm * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock. X rpmlint complains of non-utf8 documentation; see above. * final provides and requires are sane. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * %check is present and all tests pass. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From gajownik at fedora.pl Thu Apr 13 15:08:25 2006 From: gajownik at fedora.pl (Dawid Gajownik) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 17:08:25 +0200 Subject: [pysqlite 2.2.0] how to run tests in %check section? Message-ID: <443E6969.6050105@fedora.pl> Hi! I wanted to update python-sqlite2 to version 2.2.0 but I cannot run tests in %check section. It always fails with this message: Wykonywanie(%check): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.54371 + umask 022 + cd /home/rpm-build/rpmbuild/BUILD + cd pysqlite-2.2.0 + PYTHONPATH=/var/tmp/python-sqlite2-2.2.0-1-root-rpm-build/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages + /usr/bin/python -c 'from pysqlite2.test import test; test()' Traceback (most recent call last): File "", line 1, in ? File "pysqlite2/test/__init__.py", line 25, in ? from pysqlite2.test import dbapi, types, userfunctions, factory, transactions,\ File "pysqlite2/test/dbapi.py", line 26, in ? import pysqlite2.dbapi2 as sqlite File "pysqlite2/dbapi2.py", line 32, in ? from pysqlite2._sqlite import * ImportError: No module named _sqlite I don't understand it: I run this command in shell: "PYTHONPATH=/var/tmp/python-sqlite2-2.2.0-1-root-rpm-build/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages /usr/bin/python -c 'from pysqlite2.test import test; test()'" and it works fine. This also works with previous pysqlite2 releases :/ Here are links to the spec file and srpm: http://fedora.pl/~gajownik/python-sqlite2.spec http://fedora.pl/~gajownik/python-sqlite2-2.2.0-1.src.rpm Any help would be appreciated. -- ^_* From ville.skytta at iki.fi Thu Apr 13 15:29:15 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 18:29:15 +0300 Subject: Client-side certificate expiration Message-ID: <1144942156.2821.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hi, I just got bitten by expiration of my ~/.fedora.cert a few hours ago, and I'm sure others will run into this soon too, so if you see something like: $ plague-client [...] Traceback (most recent call last): [...] OpenSSL.SSL.Error: [('SSL routines', 'SSL3_READ_BYTES', 'sslv3 alert certificate expired'), ('SSL routines', 'SSL3_WRITE_BYTES', 'ssl handshake failure')] ...a fix is to fetch a new one from the "download a client-side certificate" link at https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/ From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Thu Apr 13 15:37:27 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 11:37:27 -0400 Subject: Client-side certificate expiration In-Reply-To: <1144942156.2821.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1144942156.2821.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1144942647.10731.29.camel@cutter> On Thu, 2006-04-13 at 18:29 +0300, Ville Skytt? wrote: > Hi, > > I just got bitten by expiration of my ~/.fedora.cert a few hours ago, > and I'm sure others will run into this soon too, so if you see something > like: > > $ plague-client [...] > Traceback (most recent call last): > [...] > OpenSSL.SSL.Error: [('SSL routines', 'SSL3_READ_BYTES', 'sslv3 alert certificate expired'), ('SSL routines', 'SSL3_WRITE_BYTES', 'ssl handshake failure')] > > ...a fix is to fetch a new one from the "download a client-side > certificate" link at https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/ Thanks for the tip. I added it here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/BuildRequests -sv From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 15:38:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 11:38:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185535] Review Request: lurker In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131538.k3DFcEDf005053@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lurker https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185535 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tibbs at math.uh.edu ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-13 11:38 EST ------- Some quick comments: Please use a complete URL in Source0 so that spectool can automatically fetch the source. If Sourceforge wasn't throwing "Internal server error" at the moment I'd give more detail (and I could test out a build of the package). gcc-c++ is not permitted in BuildRequires:. I imagine that RPM will figure out what you have in Requires:, but I can't verify that at the moment. It's much cleaner to refer to %{SOURCE1} rather than $RPM_SOURCE_DIR/lurker-httpd.conf.in. There's rarely a good reason to ever use $RPM_SOURCE_DIR. Is %{buildsubdir} guaranteed to be defined? I think that world-writable directory is going to be a blocker. If the end user wants to open the permissions up, that would be their business. I think modern MTAs can be configured to deliver as the appropriate user so this shouldn't be a big deal in practise. You define %{mta_owner} and %{mta_group} but don't reference them anywhere. I find that defining a macro for something that's referenced only once in the spec (like, say, %{httpdconffile}) is a bit confusing, but that's just personal taste. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 16:19:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 12:19:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187799] Review Request: perl-Cairo - Perl interface to the cairo library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131619.k3DGJdFZ013516@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Cairo - Perl interface to the cairo library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187799 tibbs at math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |tibbs at math.uh.edu OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-13 12:19 EST ------- Issues: BuildRequires: perl is not permitted. (This rule might change today.) The build fails in mock (development branch and FC5, i386 and x86_64). However, it does run outside of mock on FC5 i386. Perhaps there's a missing BuildRequires:? + make test PERL_DL_NONLAZY=1 /usr/bin/perl "-MExtUtils::Command::MM" "-e" "test_harness(0, 'blib/lib', 'blib/arch')" t/*.t t/Cairo........... # Failed test in t/Cairo.t at line 178. # got: 'no-memory' # expected: 'success' # Looks like you failed 1 test of 50. dubious Test returned status 1 (wstat 256, 0x100) DIED. FAILED test 50 Failed 1/50 tests, 98.00% okay t/CairoFont....... # Failed test 'The object isa Cairo::ScaledFont' # in t/CairoFont.t at line 56. # The object isn't defined Can't call method "status" on an undefined value at t/CairoFont.t line 57. # Looks like you planned 13 tests but only ran 10. # Looks like you failed 1 test of 10 run. # Looks like your test died just after 10. dubious Test returned status 255 (wstat 65280, 0xff00) DIED. FAILED tests 10-13 Failed 4/13 tests, 69.23% okay t/CairoMatrix.....ok t/CairoPath.......ok t/CairoPattern....ok t/CairoSurface....ok 8/19 skipped: various reasons Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- t/Cairo.t 1 256 50 1 2.00% 50 t/CairoFont.t 255 65280 13 7 53.85% 10-13 8 subtests skipped. Failed 2/6 test scripts, 66.67% okay. 5/112 subtests failed, 95.54% okay. make: *** [test_dynamic] Error 255 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.83677 (%check) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 16:41:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 12:41:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187799] Review Request: perl-Cairo - Perl interface to the cairo library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131641.k3DGf7Md018048@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Cairo - Perl interface to the cairo library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187799 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-04-13 12:41 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > BuildRequires: perl is not permitted. (This rule might change today.) It will have my vote! This has been a recurring issue... > The build fails in mock (development branch and FC5, i386 and x86_64). However, > it does run outside of mock on FC5 i386. Perhaps there's a missing BuildRequires:? > > + make test > PERL_DL_NONLAZY=1 /usr/bin/perl "-MExtUtils::Command::MM" "-e" "test_harness(0, > 'blib/lib', 'blib/arch')" t/*.t > t/Cairo........... > # Failed test in t/Cairo.t at line 178. > # got: 'no-memory' > # expected: 'success' > # Looks like you failed 1 test of 50. > dubious > Test returned status 1 (wstat 256, 0x100) > DIED. FAILED test 50 > Failed 1/50 tests, 98.00% okay > t/CairoFont....... > # Failed test 'The object isa Cairo::ScaledFont' > # in t/CairoFont.t at line 56. > # The object isn't defined > Can't call method "status" on an undefined value at t/CairoFont.t line 57. > # Looks like you planned 13 tests but only ran 10. > # Looks like you failed 1 test of 10 run. > # Looks like your test died just after 10. > dubious > Test returned status 255 (wstat 65280, 0xff00) > DIED. FAILED tests 10-13 > Failed 4/13 tests, 69.23% okay > t/CairoMatrix.....ok > t/CairoPath.......ok > t/CairoPattern....ok > t/CairoSurface....ok > 8/19 skipped: various reasons > Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > t/Cairo.t 1 256 50 1 2.00% 50 > t/CairoFont.t 255 65280 13 7 53.85% 10-13 I'm suspecting it needs xfs running... I will try to figure it out. Thanks, jpo -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From pertusus at free.fr Thu Apr 13 17:02:02 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 19:02:02 +0200 Subject: packages no longer in core page Message-ID: <20060413170202.GF7265@free.fr> Hello, I am currently doing a script (in fact, modifying Christian script) to output automatically info like the one listed at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackagesFC4 for fedora core releases since fc 1. I can currently output the list of the srpm that aren't in core development nor in extra development, but I need additional information to eliminate the packages that have been obsoleted or merged into other packages, for which it wouldn't make sense to have a package in extras (like, for example redhat-config-network. Thus I need some info like what is on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/PackagesNoLongerInDevel Does it seems worth, and what should I do next? -- Pat From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 16:58:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 12:58:27 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175198] Review Request: perl-Math-Pari In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131658.k3DGwRu2020877@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Math-Pari https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175198 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-04-13 12:58 EST ------- Paul, Sorry for the delay. MD5SUMS: c88e8dde7657098b608b07f75fbde19b perl-Math-Pari-2.010704-1.src.rpm 0397da31fbe4f5485c4e7094c3661c5a Math-Pari-2.010704.tar.gz 357b7a42e89e2761a5367bbcbfcca5f2 pari-2.1.7.tgz 2b9ed7df1bb67895b19aa7d195f2b692 perl-Math-Pari.spec Good: * Math-Pari tarball MD5 digest verified against a CPAN copy * pari 2.1.7 tarball MD5 digest verified * URL and Sources URLs are valid * License verified (README file) * perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_xxx) present * perl vendor libs present * File permissions are OK * Builds without problems in FC-3 and FC-5 * (Un)installs without problems in FC-3 and FC-5 NeedsWork: * the files libPARI.dumb.pod, Math::libPARI.dumb.3pm.gz are duplicates of libPARI.pod, Math::libPARI.3pm.gz (ok, they have slightly different formats) (Easy fix - just remove the *dumb* files) Other minor notes: * Would be nice to have Term::Gnuplot around to improve the test coverage -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From garrick at usc.edu Thu Apr 13 17:46:49 2006 From: garrick at usc.edu (Garrick Staples) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 10:46:49 -0700 Subject: [pysqlite 2.2.0] how to run tests in %check section? In-Reply-To: <443E6969.6050105@fedora.pl> References: <443E6969.6050105@fedora.pl> Message-ID: <20060413174649.GE18673@polop.usc.edu> On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 05:08:25PM +0200, Dawid Gajownik alleged: > Hi! > > I wanted to update python-sqlite2 to version 2.2.0 but I cannot run > tests in %check section. It always fails with this message: > > Wykonywanie(%check): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.54371 > + umask 022 > + cd /home/rpm-build/rpmbuild/BUILD > + cd pysqlite-2.2.0 > + PYTHONPATH=/var/tmp/python-sqlite2-2.2.0-1-root-rpm-build/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages > + /usr/bin/python -c 'from pysqlite2.test import test; test()' > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "", line 1, in ? > File "pysqlite2/test/__init__.py", line 25, in ? > from pysqlite2.test import dbapi, types, userfunctions, factory, > transactions,\ > File "pysqlite2/test/dbapi.py", line 26, in ? > import pysqlite2.dbapi2 as sqlite > File "pysqlite2/dbapi2.py", line 32, in ? > from pysqlite2._sqlite import * > ImportError: No module named _sqlite Need to export PYTHONPATH before running python? -- Garrick Staples, Linux/HPCC Administrator University of Southern California -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 17:54:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:54:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179852] /dev/std* missing in mock - FE buildsystem In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131754.k3DHscQZ032749@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: /dev/std* missing in mock - FE buildsystem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179852 ------- Additional Comments From williams at redhat.com 2006-04-13 13:54 EST ------- I setup a plague server on an FC5 x86_64 system to try and duplicate the build failure for wine-docs. I used the plague*-0.4.4.1-1.fc5 packages with mock-0.4.8.fc5 (with the /dev/std{in,out,err} changes) and the build completed successfully. Before I try and track down an availble FC4 system and do this again, I'd like to see the results of pushing the mock-0.4.8* for fc4 out to the build system. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From gajownik at fedora.pl Thu Apr 13 18:21:19 2006 From: gajownik at fedora.pl (Dawid Gajownik) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 20:21:19 +0200 Subject: [pysqlite 2.2.0] how to run tests in %check section? In-Reply-To: <20060413174649.GE18673@polop.usc.edu> References: <443E6969.6050105@fedora.pl> <20060413174649.GE18673@polop.usc.edu> Message-ID: <443E969F.8040509@fedora.pl> Dnia 04/13/2006 07:47 PM, U?ytkownik Garrick Staples napisa?: > Need to export PYTHONPATH before running python? I tried that before but it does not resolve the problem. What bothers me is the fact that it works in normal shell but not in rpm spec file. Anyway, thanks for your help. -- ^_* From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 18:24:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 14:24:13 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188458] Review Request: libassetml - xml resource database library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131824.k3DIODa7007882@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libassetml - xml resource database library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188458 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-13 14:24 EST ------- (In reply to comment #5) > SHOULDFIX > ========= > * This isn't a blocker, but you can get rid of the rpmlint warning by > removing the execute permission bit on the offending source file in %prep. > Thanks for the tip I'll fix that before importing, and thanks for the review! > * -devel owns %datadir/gnome. However, it seems that almost 20 other packages > also claim to own this directory, so this isn't a blocker. Perhaps you > can restrict the ownership to %datadir/gnome/help/%name? > Erm, since there is no logical package to depend on for this dir your suggestion could lead to unowned dirs which is worse then having dirs owned by many. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 18:45:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 14:45:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179852] /dev/std* missing in mock - FE buildsystem In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131845.k3DIjGJW014849@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: /dev/std* missing in mock - FE buildsystem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179852 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-04-13 14:44 EST ------- Please see comment 4. The same wine-docs package has never before failed for FC-5 (still called "devel" at the time this ticket was new). FC-4 buildsys is the one place where it fails. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 13 18:51:51 2006 From: mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org (Mike McGrath) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:51:51 -0500 Subject: RRDtool is in need of attention In-Reply-To: References: <20060412181252.4f388242@python2> Message-ID: <443E9DC7.2070109@fedoraproject.org> > I use it a lot and don't mind maintaining it > > Looks like cacti and munin are the two packages already in Extras which > use it. Do they both work with 1.2? > > later, > chris > > Chris, if you use it a lot directly you should take it. All of my interaction with it is via Cacti. -Mike From gemi at bluewin.ch Thu Apr 13 19:08:15 2006 From: gemi at bluewin.ch (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard?= Milmeister) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 21:08:15 +0200 Subject: SELinux settings in SPEC file Message-ID: <1144955295.14223.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> I have now the following lines in the SPEC file for gcl: Requires(post): policycoreutils Requires(postun): policycoreutils ... %post /usr/sbin/semanage fcontext -a -t textrel_shlib_t "%{_libdir}/gcl-%{version}/unixport/saved_ansi_gcl" /sbin/restorecon "%{_libdir}/gcl-%{version}/unixport/saved_ansi_gcl" %postun /usr/sbin/semanage fcontext -d -t textrel_shlib_t "%{_libdir}/gcl-%{version}/unixport/saved_ansi_gcl" Is this acceptable? The package only builds with SELinux disabled, but this is the case on the buildsystem, so I don't think it will be a problem. -- G?rard Milmeister Langackerstrasse 49 CH-8057 Z?rich From ville.skytta at iki.fi Thu Apr 13 19:37:20 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 22:37:20 +0300 Subject: [pysqlite 2.2.0] how to run tests in %check section? In-Reply-To: <443E969F.8040509@fedora.pl> References: <443E6969.6050105@fedora.pl> <20060413174649.GE18673@polop.usc.edu> <443E969F.8040509@fedora.pl> Message-ID: <1144957041.2821.37.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-04-13 at 20:21 +0200, Dawid Gajownik wrote: > Dnia 04/13/2006 07:47 PM, U?ytkownik Garrick Staples napisa?: > > > Need to export PYTHONPATH before running python? > > I tried that before but it does not resolve the problem. What bothers me > is the fact that it works in normal shell but not in rpm spec file. If run in the build directory, it doesn't work in a shell either. Python apparently becomes confused because there's a pysqlite2 subdir containing some of the needed files but no _sqlite.so in the current dir. cd'ing somewhere else in %check (for example /tmp) before running the tests appears to work around it. I'm not qualified to say for sure, but it does smell like a bug in pysqlite or python to me. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 19:35:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 15:35:08 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188625] Review Request: AllegroOgg - Ogg library for use with the Allegro game library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131935.k3DJZ8Bd027854@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: AllegroOgg - Ogg library for use with the Allegro game library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188625 ------- Additional Comments From tkmame at retrogames.com 2006-04-13 15:35 EST ------- allegro-ogg makes me think that it's part of the allego source packages. AllegoOgg seems fine to me. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 19:58:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 15:58:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188625] Review Request: AllegroOgg - Ogg library for use with the Allegro game library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604131958.k3DJwsH6002806@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: AllegroOgg - Ogg library for use with the Allegro game library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188625 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-13 15:58 EST ------- (In reply to comment #5) > allegro-ogg makes me think that it's part of the allego source packages. FWIW, it's a usual way of naming addon/plugin packages to which people are accustomed to. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#head-e865dfbf5ffb4156a1bdf299ace96f48af903a7a -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From gauret at free.fr Thu Apr 13 20:18:32 2006 From: gauret at free.fr (Aurelien Bompard) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 22:18:32 +0200 Subject: SELinux settings in SPEC file References: <1144955295.14223.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: G?rard Milmeister wrote: > I have now the following lines in the SPEC file for gcl: > > Requires(post): policycoreutils > Requires(postun): policycoreutils > ... > %post > /usr/sbin/semanage fcontext -a -t textrel_shlib_t > "%{_libdir}/gcl-%{version}/unixport/saved_ansi_gcl" > /sbin/restorecon "%{_libdir}/gcl-%{version}/unixport/saved_ansi_gcl" > %postun > /usr/sbin/semanage fcontext -d -t textrel_shlib_t > "%{_libdir}/gcl-%{version}/unixport/saved_ansi_gcl" > > Is this acceptable? The package only builds with SELinux disabled, > but this is the case on the buildsystem, so I don't think it > will be a problem. I've been asking questions on fedora-selinux-list recently to add SELinux support to Awstats, and I've come up with almost the same additions : a call to semanage to add the policy and a call to chcon to set the context. The use of chcon was what I've been suggested, but restorecon looks OK to me too. I've been thinking about setting up a Wiki page about it, or adding a section to the Packaging/Guidelines Well. It's a wiki. I'm going to do that. Aur?lien -- http://aurelien.bompard.org ~~~~ Jabber : abompard at jabber.fr "Never trust a computer you can't throw out a window." -- Steve Wozniak From gajownik at fedora.pl Thu Apr 13 20:34:42 2006 From: gajownik at fedora.pl (Dawid Gajownik) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 22:34:42 +0200 Subject: [pysqlite 2.2.0] how to run tests in %check section? In-Reply-To: <1144957041.2821.37.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <443E6969.6050105@fedora.pl> <20060413174649.GE18673@polop.usc.edu> <443E969F.8040509@fedora.pl> <1144957041.2821.37.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <443EB5E2.7090806@fedora.pl> Dnia 04/13/2006 09:37 PM, U?ytkownik Ville Skytt? napisa?: > If run in the build directory, it doesn't work in a shell either. Oh, I never run it in the build directory - this explains why it worked in shell. > Python apparently becomes confused because there's a pysqlite2 subdir > containing some of the needed files but no _sqlite.so in the current > dir. cd'ing somewhere else in %check (for example /tmp) before running > the tests appears to work around it. Thanks for the workaround! You're my hero of the day :D -- ^_* From gauret at free.fr Thu Apr 13 20:53:01 2006 From: gauret at free.fr (Aurelien Bompard) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 22:53:01 +0200 Subject: SELinux settings in SPEC file References: <1144955295.14223.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: Aurelien Bompard wrote: > Well. It's a wiki. I'm going to do that. Done: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SELinux - I'm not a native english speaker, so there's probably mistakes all over the place. Edit to you heart's content. - Please also review the content. It's mainly extracted from discussions on fedora-selinux-list, so it should be OK. - As you discover better ways and other use cases, please add to this page. My next target is to give SELinux protection to pure-ftpd. Fun ahead :) Thanks, Aur?lien -- http://aurelien.bompard.org ~~~~ Jabber : abompard at jabber.fr "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 21:02:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 17:02:34 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188625] Review Request: AllegroOgg - Ogg library for use with the Allegro game library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604132102.k3DL2Ysu016907@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: AllegroOgg - Ogg library for use with the Allegro game library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188625 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-13 17:02 EST ------- I still don't like allegro-ogg because: -people won't be able to find allegroogg if they are looking for it, if I want to see if something is already in FE, usualy because I need it as a requierement I usualy do a yum list "**". Now I know if the is perl-* or *-perl or the samewith python to only search for the * part, but in this case I'm seriously concerned that people won't be able to find it. -it indeed suggests that its a subpackage of allegro, which make the unique identifier part purely -ogg, but the problem in the first place is that there are 2 alogg's: http://lyrian.obnix.com/alogg/ http://nekros.freeshell.org/delirium/alogg.html Since I want to avoid confusion I _really?_ want to use the upstream name, including ugly caps, so I guess I should name it AlegroOGG althouhg I find AllegroOgg better (less ugly) and that also makes it clear which alogg it is. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From gemi at bluewin.ch Thu Apr 13 21:10:45 2006 From: gemi at bluewin.ch (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard?= Milmeister) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 23:10:45 +0200 Subject: SELinux settings in SPEC file In-Reply-To: References: <1144955295.14223.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: <1144962645.18466.1.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> On Thu, 2006-04-13 at 22:53 +0200, Aurelien Bompard wrote: > Aurelien Bompard wrote: > > Well. It's a wiki. I'm going to do that. > > Done: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SELinux > > - I'm not a native english speaker, so there's probably mistakes all over > the place. Edit to you heart's content. > > - Please also review the content. It's mainly extracted from discussions on > fedora-selinux-list, so it should be OK. > > - As you discover better ways and other use cases, please add to this page. > My next target is to give SELinux protection to pure-ftpd. Fun ahead :) Looks good for a start. Don't you think using restorecon instead of chcon would be safer? The probability of missing something is smaller. Do these scripts work when SELinux is not installed, resp. completely disabled? -- G?rard Milmeister Langackerstrasse 49 CH-8057 Z?rich From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 21:28:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 17:28:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179852] /dev/std* missing in mock - FE buildsystem In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604132128.k3DLSve6022871@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: /dev/std* missing in mock - FE buildsystem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179852 ------- Additional Comments From williams at redhat.com 2006-04-13 17:28 EST ------- Sorry, I completely missed the devel == FC5 connection. Back to the drawing board -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Thu Apr 13 22:37:56 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 00:37:56 +0200 Subject: packages no longer in core page In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 13 Apr 2006 19:02:02 +0200." <20060413170202.GF7265@free.fr> Message-ID: <200604132238.k3DMcFTe005180@mx3.redhat.com> pertusus at free.fr said: > I am currently doing a script (in fact, modifying Christian script) BTW, could I put this script in fedora's CVS somewhere ? Maybe along with a few other QA scripts that seem to popup here and there ? I think it'd make it easier for others to access and modify it when needed... (And I know I haven't been very good at keeping it up-to-date on the wiki page...) Thoughts ? Cheers, Christian From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 22:42:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 18:42:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188090] Review Request: gpsd In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604132242.k3DMgGl1004474@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gpsd https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188090 matt at truch.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From matt at truch.net 2006-04-13 18:42 EST ------- Built and should be available shortly. Thanks again for the review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 22:45:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 18:45:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188351] Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604132245.k3DMjdbu004921@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188351 fedora.wickert at arcor.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |fedora.wickert at arcor.de OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-04-13 18:45 EST ------- Hi Tim, just a few comments: - Source0 needs an absolute URL like http://... - The %files section looks broken, the package doesn't own %{_datadir}/gphpedit/. - You are replacing a hardcoded path with another hardcoded one in the specfile. Better use sed -i s_/usr/local/share/pixmaps_%{_datadir}/pixmaps_ src/main.h - Please add the categories "GNOME" and "Application" to gphpedit.desktop The rest looks good to me. I'm going to do a review ASAP. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From wart at kobold.org Thu Apr 13 23:06:24 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Michael Thomas) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 16:06:24 -0700 Subject: orphans in comps file Message-ID: <443ED970.7060807@kobold.org> I've found a couple of orphaned packages in the FE5 comps file that don't exist in the repo: sirius and gnofract4d. Unless there's a good reason to leave them there, I'll delete the comps entries. On a related note, there's one package in the 'games' group called 'qqo' that has been there since the comps file was imported. Since there's no package by that name in FE, nor is there a bugzilla entry or an entry in owners.list, I'm inclined to remove it. --Mike -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3820 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From pertusus at free.fr Thu Apr 13 23:07:56 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 01:07:56 +0200 Subject: packages no longer in core page In-Reply-To: <200604132238.k3DMcFTe005180@mx3.redhat.com> References: <20060413170202.GF7265@free.fr> <200604132238.k3DMcFTe005180@mx3.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060413230756.GB2360@free.fr> > (And I know I haven't been very good at keeping it up-to-date on the wiki > page...) Here is the patch I made against the wiki version of your script. It is not incredibly complicated ;-). I have commented out all that is linked with output. I also think that it could be good to have an explanation on how to generate the csv from bugzilla, that you use with your script. -- Pat -------------- next part -------------- --- parseBZbugList.pl-orig 2006-04-13 16:15:35.000000000 +0200 +++ parseBZbugList.pl 2006-04-13 16:57:28.000000000 +0200 @@ -33,6 +33,14 @@ &usage() if defined $opt{'help'}; +my $first_core_rel = 1; +my $last_core_rel = 5; +my %CORE_SRPMS; +my %CORE_DROPPED_SRPMS; +my %DROPPED_SRPMS; +my $core_url = "http://mirrors.kernel.org/fedora/core/"; +my $core_dir = '/SRPMS/'; + my $FE_NEW = 163776; my $FE_REVIEW = 163778; my $FE_ACCEPT = 163779; @@ -134,6 +142,30 @@ foreach my $k (keys %CORE) { $SRPMS{$k} = 1; } + +#open (DROPPED,">dropped.txt"); +for (my $i = $last_core_rel -1; $i>=$first_core_rel;$i--) +{ + my $url = $core_url . $i . $core_dir; + $CORE_SRPMS{$i} = {}; + &grabRepoList($url, $CORE_SRPMS{$i}); + + #print "Package removed from fc $i and not in extras\n"; + foreach my $k (keys %{$CORE_SRPMS{$i}}) + { + unless ($SRPMS{$k} or $DROPPED_SRPMS{$k}) + { + #print "$k "; + #print DROPPED "$k\n"; + $CORE_DROPPED_SRPMS{$i}->{$k} = 1; + $DROPPED_SRPMS{$k} = 1; + } + } + print "\n"; +} +#close (DROPPED); +#exit 0; + while ( <> ) { s/[,\n]+$//; my @F = split /,/; From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 23:17:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 19:17:05 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188351] Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604132317.k3DNH5tt009477@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188351 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at timj.co.uk 2006-04-13 19:17 EST ------- Thanks for the comments Christoph! All fixed, with the exception of Source0: the upstream site doesn't have a proper URL to download from (it is obscured by a download hit-tracker). I've already requested that the author adds a proper URL (e.g. http://www.gphpedit.org/downloads/gphpedit-%{version}.tar.gz). New SRPM: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/srpms/gphpedit-0.9.80-2.src.rpm Spec in same place as before. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From wart at kobold.org Thu Apr 13 23:27:28 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Michael Thomas) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 16:27:28 -0700 Subject: comps.xml updates? Message-ID: <443EDE60.3030606@kobold.org> I've noticed that there are a number of packages in the Games group in comps-fe5.xml.in in CVS that don't show up when I run 'yum groupinfo games' in FE5. Upon further investigation, it seems that none of the changes to the games group in comps-fe5.xml.in are reflected with 'yum groupinfo games'. I recall earlier messages that instructed us to only edit comps-fe5.xml.in. What else needs to be done to get these changes pushed to the mirrors so that 'yum groupinfo' can pick up the changes? --Mike -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3820 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Thu Apr 13 23:29:31 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 00:29:31 +0100 Subject: Removal of orphaned packages Message-ID: <1144970971.3821.36.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, It was recently discussed on here that the importing of sodipodi may not be that good as inkscape is the successor. Would it be worthwhile removing any packages on the orphaned list where there is a successor? TTFN Paul -- "Wenn eine gro?e Vision zu gro? ist, kann sie dich t?ten - du ?berschreitest deine Grenzen in der sicheren ?berzeugung, den vor dir liegenden Weg zu kennen." - Linus Torvals -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 23:25:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 19:25:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177512] Review Request: mysql-connector-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604132325.k3DNPLtX010954@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mysql-connector-net https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177512 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-13 19:25 EST ------- ping - any action happening on this or the other mono packages I have for review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 23:28:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 19:28:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182319] Review Request: anjuta-gdl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604132328.k3DNSSEs011393@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: anjuta-gdl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182319 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-13 19:28 EST ------- ping! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 23:29:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 19:29:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 167364] Review Request: Fuse emulator utilities In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604132329.k3DNTQ72011550@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Fuse emulator utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167364 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-13 19:29 EST ------- Can someone please review this for accepting into extras? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bdpepple at ameritech.net Thu Apr 13 23:39:08 2006 From: bdpepple at ameritech.net (Brian Pepple) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 19:39:08 -0400 Subject: Removal of orphaned packages In-Reply-To: <1144970971.3821.36.camel@T7.Linux> References: <1144970971.3821.36.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <1144971548.6282.3.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 00:29 +0100, Paul wrote: > Hi, > > It was recently discussed on here that the importing of sodipodi may not > be that good as inkscape is the successor. > > Would it be worthwhile removing any packages on the orphaned list where > there is a successor? > Hasn't development for sodipodi pretty much stopped? I think that more than anything, is the relevant issue. /B -- Brian Pepple gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 14 03:27:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 23:27:05 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604140327.k3E3R5K1020314@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us 2006-04-13 23:26 EST ------- Updated Spec/SRPM: Spec Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2.7.1-1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.2.7.1-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From gauret at free.fr Fri Apr 14 06:52:30 2006 From: gauret at free.fr (Aurelien Bompard) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 08:52:30 +0200 Subject: SELinux settings in SPEC file References: <1144955295.14223.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> <1144962645.18466.1.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: G?rard Milmeister wrote: > Looks good for a start. Don't you think using restorecon instead of > chcon would be safer? The probability of missing something is smaller. I guess restorecon is better if you need to change a directory with different types in it. It clearer that multiple chcon's. Otherwise I think it can be left to the packager's preference. > Do these scripts work when SELinux is not installed, resp. completely > disabled? No idea. I'll add a TODO section to the page, and point feodra-selinux-list at it. Aur?lien -- http://aurelien.bompard.org ~~~~ Jabber : abompard at jabber.fr "Never test for an error condition you don't know how to handle." -- Steinbach's Guideline for Systems Programming From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 14 07:15:55 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 09:15:55 +0200 Subject: Removal of orphaned packages In-Reply-To: <1144970971.3821.36.camel@T7.Linux> References: <1144970971.3821.36.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <20060414071554.GA2405@free.fr> On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 12:29:31AM +0100, Paul wrote: > Hi, > > It was recently discussed on here that the importing of sodipodi may not > be that good as inkscape is the successor. > > Would it be worthwhile removing any packages on the orphaned list where > there is a successor? I think it wouldn't. In my opinion the orphaned packages should be removed based on maintainership/packaging criteria, not on potential usability criteria. If it doesn't build, has unfixed bugs and isn't required by another package, for example, but not because there is something said to be better. -- Pat From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Fri Apr 14 07:34:49 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 08:34:49 +0100 Subject: Removal of orphaned packages In-Reply-To: <20060414071554.GA2405@free.fr> References: <1144970971.3821.36.camel@T7.Linux> <20060414071554.GA2405@free.fr> Message-ID: <1145000089.3821.43.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > > Would it be worthwhile removing any packages on the orphaned list where > > there is a successor? > > I think it wouldn't. In my opinion the orphaned packages should be removed > based on maintainership/packaging criteria, not on potential usability > criteria. If it doesn't build, has unfixed bugs and isn't required by > another package, for example, but not because there is something said to > be better. With a small number of changes to the spec file, sodipodi compiled fine. The problem though is that it's at version 0.34 (which is fine, so is the upstream version - but it's over a year old). IMO, if a package isn't picked up after (say) 6 months, it should be dropped. If someone wants to take it back up, they should go through the new package procedure. TTFN Paul -- "Wenn eine gro?e Vision zu gro? ist, kann sie dich t?ten - du ?berschreitest deine Grenzen in der sicheren ?berzeugung, den vor dir liegenden Weg zu kennen." - Linus Torvals -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de Fri Apr 14 09:37:37 2006 From: enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de (Enrico Scholz) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 11:37:37 +0200 Subject: SELinux settings in SPEC file In-Reply-To: <1144955295.14223.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> (=?iso-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard?= Milmeister's message of "Thu, 13 Apr 2006 21:08:15 +0200") References: <1144955295.14223.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: <878xq8pkf2.fsf@kosh.bigo.ensc.de> gemi at bluewin.ch (G?rard Milmeister) writes: > %post > /usr/sbin/semanage fcontext -a -t textrel_shlib_t "%{_libdir}/gcl-%{version}/unixport/saved_ansi_gcl" > /sbin/restorecon "%{_libdir}/gcl-%{version}/unixport/saved_ansi_gcl" > %postun > /usr/sbin/semanage fcontext -d -t textrel_shlib_t "%{_libdir}/gcl-%{version}/unixport/saved_ansi_gcl" > > Is this acceptable? You should add a '|| :' after each command to avoid problems when SELinux is disabled or when /usr is mounted read-only. Enrico -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 482 bytes Desc: not available URL: From gauret at free.fr Fri Apr 14 09:49:13 2006 From: gauret at free.fr (Aurelien Bompard) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 11:49:13 +0200 Subject: SELinux settings in SPEC file References: <1144955295.14223.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> <878xq8pkf2.fsf@kosh.bigo.ensc.de> Message-ID: Enrico Scholz wrote: > You should add a '|| :' after each command to avoid problems when SELinux > is disabled or when /usr is mounted read-only. Right. The semanage call will also fail on upgrades, since the policy is already defined. So you'll have to add 2>/dev/null too. Aur?lien. -- http://aurelien.bompard.org ~~~~ Jabber : abompard at jabber.fr "Unix was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things." -- Doug Gwyn From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 14 10:12:21 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 12:12:21 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy Message-ID: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Currently, there is a rough proposal of an End-of-Life Policy for Fedora Extras under review, which is in need of comments from the community of contributors: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/EolPolicy In my own words, the plan is: In accordance with the Fedora Core life-cycle and with a Security Policy for Fedora Extras--which is work in progress, too--we need to distinguish between active and legacy versions of Fedora Extras. When a release of Fedora Core is transferred to Fedora Legacy, something similar is done with the corresponding branch of Fedora Extras. The policies for a branch of Fedora Extras, which becomes legacy, would be extended in a way which allows for contributions from a _Fedora Extras Legacy_ team. These contributors would [be permitted to] take over package maintenance where fixes for security vulnerabilities or critical bugs are needed and when the primary package owner does not wish to do such updates himself. A few problems need to be discussed and solved: * When a release of Fedora Core becomes legacy, not seldomly a Fedora Extras package maintainer moves on to the current or latest release of Fedora Core and stops preparing/testing/publishing updates for the legacy versions. Since not every package maintainer would "support" old legacy branches, we need a way to mark individual package branches as "free for adoption by Fedora Extras Legacy". With this comes the need to monitor corresponding bugzilla tickets of specific branches. It may be necessary to give legacy branches of Fedora Extras a new "Product" name in bugzilla, so a default package owner can be different compared with the primary owner for active releases. * While a legacy branch of Fedora Extras, which would be in sort of a maintenance state, may be kept alive with security and bug fix updates, it will be necessary to announce its end-of-life when the corresponding legacy release of Fedora Core is discontinued by the Fedora Legacy project. We need a policy to shut down a branch finally. Possibly the buildsys could reject build jobs for such a branch. * Do we have enough contributor interest in legacy branches of Fedora Extras? And if not, are enough contributors interested in building the Fedora Extras Legacy team? It may be necessary to give it a try to find out. There are around 1600 packages in owners.list. * With terms like "end-of-life", "life-cycle", "maintenance state" come promises with regard to the expectations raised by our users. It is important that we don't keep a legacy branch open just because parts of the contributor community insist on publishing updates for it, while the majority has moved on to do only the current branches. What level of maintenance do we [try to] promise our users? Do we lower their expectations with regard to a legacy branch of Fedora Extras compared with an active branch? If we promise a certain level of maintenance for a legacy branch (e.g. timely security updates) we need to keep up equal or higher quality for the active branches, e.g. with policies that lead to improved response times where package owners are absent/slow/not_responding. * During its legacy maintenance state, do we lock a branch, so that no new packages (i.e. packages which have not been in Fedora Extras before) may be added? With adding new packages to a legacy branch comes the promise to maintain those packages in that branch till end-of-life. Else the workload for the Fedora Extras Legacy team would increase retroactively. Or we may need to let FESCO judge about it on a case-by-case basis. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 14 10:16:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 06:16:58 -0400 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604141016.k3EAGwQD027571@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: initng https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459 ------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de 2006-04-14 06:16 EST ------- I would use virtual packages to express the initng -> ifiles dependency; e.g. ,-- initng.spec: | Requires: initng(ifiles) ,-- initng-ifiles: | Provides: initng(ifiles) (the parenthesis are just syntactic sugar; don't use it when you dislike it) Currently, you require the specific 'initng-ifiles' package which bring in my concerns from comment #215. Else: * I would not use versioned BuildRequires; you want a certain upstream version (API) of the selinux libraries but support for expression such a wish was removed some time ago from 'rpm'. Currently you can express a wish for a certain package version only; every supported Fedora Core version has these package versions so it is superflously. Since Fedora Extras tends to minimize the explicitly stated BuildRequires:, the version should be removed. Ditto for 'filesystem >= 2.2.4-1'; Fedora Core >= 4 has this package. * initng-devel should require full-versioned main-package (inclusive %release) * Missing SMP flags. If it doesn't build with it, please add a comment (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#parallelmake) (cited from comment #9) * the first part of %post should be moved into a | %triggerin -- mkinitrd section. You should add | Requires(triggerin): grep coreutils too. The 'grep ... >/dev/null' can be expressed as | grep -q ... * are the '*.la' files really needed? * the | %install | ... | mv %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/doc/%{name}/* %{buildroot}/%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/ | cp -a COPYING AUTHORS ... %{buildroot}/%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/ | ... | %files | %doc %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version} can be written as | %install | ... | mkdir _doc | mv %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/doc/%{name}/* _doc/ | | %files | %doc COPYING AUTHORS ... | %doc _doc/* * the URL must be updated * the provided .bz2 should be used instead of the .gz * the '/%{_includedir}' in | %files devel | /%{_includedir}/initng can be written without leading '/' as | %{_includedir}/initng -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From dragoran at feuerpokemon.de Fri Apr 14 10:27:13 2006 From: dragoran at feuerpokemon.de (dragoran) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 12:27:13 +0200 Subject: SELinux settings in SPEC file In-Reply-To: <1144955295.14223.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> References: <1144955295.14223.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: <443F7901.4020308@feuerpokemon.de> G?rard Milmeister wrote: > I have now the following lines in the SPEC file for gcl: > > Requires(post): policycoreutils > Requires(postun): policycoreutils > ... > %post > /usr/sbin/semanage fcontext -a -t textrel_shlib_t > "%{_libdir}/gcl-%{version}/unixport/saved_ansi_gcl" > /sbin/restorecon "%{_libdir}/gcl-%{version}/unixport/saved_ansi_gcl" > %postun > /usr/sbin/semanage fcontext -d -t textrel_shlib_t > "%{_libdir}/gcl-%{version}/unixport/saved_ansi_gcl" > > Is this acceptable? The package only builds with SELinux disabled, > but this is the case on the buildsystem, so I don't think it > will be a problem. > > but what about FC4 ? those commands are FC5/rawhide only right? From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Fri Apr 14 10:41:08 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 12:41:08 +0200 (CEST) Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <40489.192.54.193.51.1145011268.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Could you add your proposition to the wiki ? It's not the same one Jesse Keating proposed. Different enough in fact I would accept it, but not the wiki one. -- Nicolas Mailhot From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 14 11:11:02 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 13:11:02 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> > A few problems need to be discussed and solved: > > * When a release of Fedora Core becomes legacy, not seldomly a Fedora > Extras package maintainer moves on to the current or latest release of > Fedora Core and stops preparing/testing/publishing updates for the legacy > versions. Since not every package maintainer would "support" old legacy > branches, we need a way to mark individual package branches as "free for > adoption by Fedora Extras Legacy". With this comes the need to monitor Maybe, before adoption by fedora extras legacy team, it should be possible to have a possibility for individual contributors that are interested in older branches of the project to take over maintainance of the older branches. This could simply achieved by saying so to the maintainer of the active branches and adding oneself to the owners.list to get the bugs for that package, import the cvs package and work only on the old branches. > corresponding bugzilla tickets of specific branches. It may be necessary > to give legacy branches of Fedora Extras a new "Product" name in bugzilla, > so a default package owner can be different compared with the primary > owner for active releases. I don't think it is really needed in many cases, unless the primary owner don't want to get the bugs of the older releases. As long as he doesn't have to fix them I think he won't mind receiving the bug reports. I am more for a comaintainership with verbal agreement on who do what. If there are 2 contributors one being the primary contributor which don't want to maintain old releases, the other being a maintainer interested in the old packages, it is likely that they would collaborate. I cannot really imagine the primary maintainer not helping the maintainer of old versions, and it would also be strange for a maintainer of old branch to refuse to update the main package when, for example there is a security issue and the maintainer is on vacations... > * Do we have enough contributor interest in legacy branches of Fedora > Extras? And if not, are enough contributors interested in building the > Fedora Extras Legacy team? It may be necessary to give it a try to find > out. There are around 1600 packages in owners.list. The only way would be to have a way for packagers to signify that they don't want to maintain a package anymore, and a way for a maintainer to step in to maintain the old version. Then count and publish the packages that still haven't a maintainer and ask people to sign for being in the fedora extras legacy team. In my opinion, being in the fedora extras legacy team shouldn't involve much more than editing owners.list, and subscribing to a list where fedora extras legacy bug reports go. Does anybody have anything else in mind? I think that the packages should be set to the unmaintained for eol release by default, such that the owner must actively step in. I don't have a precise idea on how to do that technically, however. > * With terms like "end-of-life", "life-cycle", "maintenance state" come > promises with regard to the expectations raised by our users. It is > important that we don't keep a legacy branch open just because parts of > the contributor community insist on publishing updates for it, while the > majority has moved on to do only the current branches. What level of Why not? If a part of the community is willing to maintain a package, they should be able to do it. > maintenance do we [try to] promise our users? Do we lower their > expectations with regard to a legacy branch of Fedora Extras compared with > an active branch? If we promise a certain level of maintenance for a > legacy branch (e.g. timely security updates) we need to keep up equal or > higher quality for the active branches, e.g. with policies that lead to > improved response times where package owners are absent/slow/not_responding. I think we shouldn't promise anything, be it for eol or not eol fedora extra packages. What we must provide however, is an infrastructure and some rules that allows contributors to do te best maintainance possible. That means allowing for multiple owners, maybe a security/legacy team and so on. > * During its legacy maintenance state, do we lock a branch, so that no > new packages (i.e. packages which have not been in Fedora Extras before) > may be added? With adding new packages to a legacy branch comes the > promise to maintain those packages in that branch till end-of-life. Else I think that it would be right to let packagers who want to to add new packages, a packager that wants to add a version for eol fedora versions shouldn't be discouraged to do so. But I also agree that it should be accompanied by the promise to maintain the package for that branch also, at least until he orphans the same package for all the fedora versions that are not eol. In the same way I think that packagers shouldn't be discouraged to update to the newest releases, and not only backport security fixes, if the packager prefers that. And it doesn't cause too much deps issues, of course. -- Pat From paul at city-fan.org Fri Apr 14 11:52:40 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 12:52:40 +0100 Subject: SELinux settings in SPEC file In-Reply-To: References: <1144955295.14223.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> <1144962645.18466.1.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: <1145015561.32160.10.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 08:52 +0200, Aurelien Bompard wrote: > G?rard Milmeister wrote: > > Looks good for a start. Don't you think using restorecon instead of > > chcon would be safer? The probability of missing something is smaller. > > I guess restorecon is better if you need to change a directory with > different types in it. It clearer that multiple chcon's. > Otherwise I think it can be left to the packager's preference. > > > Do these scripts work when SELinux is not installed, resp. completely > > disabled? > > No idea. I'll add a TODO section to the page, and point feodra-selinux-list > at it. You can use /usr/sbin/selinuxenabled (if present) to determine whether SELinux is enabled or not. Paul. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 14 12:10:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 08:10:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187430] Review Request: elektra In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604141210.k3ECANwW015819@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: elektra https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187430 ------- Additional Comments From avi at unix.sh 2006-04-14 08:10 EST ------- Is there anything missing here to go ahead with this approval ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 14 12:34:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 08:34:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 185606] Template file for libraries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604141234.k3ECYQMN019700@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Template file for libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185606 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-04-14 08:34 EST ------- Works for me. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 14 12:50:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 08:50:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187430] Review Request: elektra In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604141250.k3ECoCFn022880@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: elektra https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187430 pertusus at free.fr changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pertusus at free.fr ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-14 08:50 EST ------- The spec file is still in very bad shape with regard with fedora extras packaging rules and standards. I'll make a few comments but I would advise you to read the packaging guildelines more thoroughly, and have a look at similar packages by importing their cvs directories. You could also have a look at the standard spec file template. * don't use a specific server name (aleron) from sourceforge * if libxml2 isn't picked automatically by rpm add a comment to say so, and explain why * the following seems to be a bad cut and paste %package backend-berkeleydb Summary: Include files and API documentation for Elektra Project * DTDVERSION isn't usefull * You don't use macros like %{_bindir} and the like. This is mandatory * The Setup for parallel builds part seems very strange. You should use what is advertized in the packaging guidelines. * the %clean section is wrong * %deffatr is not standard * no need to add %docs for man pages * No need of Backwards compatibility, from the Linux Registry days * autoamke and autoconf and so on don't seem to be required * the devel and main package aren't set up how they should be. * Why not use %configure? In fact the shape of the spec file seems to show that you haven't read anything of the packaging guidelines/how to become a fedora contributor. It seems that you need to be sponsored, but in my opinion you should try to show that you are more willing to follow the guidelines for fedora contributors and actively show your want to be of fedora extras, and not only throw a package in the build system. I'd be pleased to be wrong, however ;-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 14 12:54:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 08:54:13 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187430] Review Request: elektra In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604141254.k3ECsDVt023564@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: elektra https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187430 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-14 08:53 EST ------- Forgot to say that the changelog is much too long for an initial submission, and it shouldn't be a duplicate for the upstream changelog but hold only what is related to packaging. You should have a look at some examples. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From gauret at free.fr Fri Apr 14 13:10:12 2006 From: gauret at free.fr (Aurelien Bompard) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 15:10:12 +0200 Subject: SELinux settings in SPEC file References: <1144955295.14223.3.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> <1144962645.18466.1.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> <1145015561.32160.10.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> Message-ID: Paul Howarth wrote: >> > Do these scripts work when SELinux is not installed, resp. completely >> > disabled? >> >> No idea. I'll add a TODO section to the page, and point >> feodra-selinux-list at it. > > You can use /usr/sbin/selinuxenabled (if present) to determine whether > SELinux is enabled or not. Yes, but do I need to ? If it just does nothing with selinux disabled, I don't even have to test it. If if fails or wreaks havoc, on the contrary... Aur?lien -- http://aurelien.bompard.org ~~~~ Jabber : abompard at jabber.fr "As we enjoy great advantages from inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours ; and this we should do freely and generously." -- Benjamin Franklin From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 14 13:06:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 09:06:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187430] Review Request: elektra In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604141306.k3ED6Ix7025347@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: elektra https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187430 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-14 09:06 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) > But with the changelog, I meant a changelog for the package. So for now, only a > 'Initial build' would be enough, something like this: > ---------- > * Fri Mar 31 2006 Avi Alkalay 0.6.0-0.1 > - Initial build. > ---------- Agreed. > In the buildrequires section you have db4-devel. Are you sure that the berkeley > sub-package doesn't need db4 to work? And GConf2 and libxml? These should be picked up automatically by rpm. > Further, you're using $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, please change those in %{buildroot} It is not required to use one or the other form, as long as the use of one or the other is consistent (and consistent with the optflags). > and I'm not sure, but I thought that calling /sbin/ldconfig wasn't necessary. As there are some dynamic libs installed, the ldconfig call is necessary. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From rdieter at math.unl.edu Fri Apr 14 13:31:24 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 08:31:24 -0500 Subject: owners owners.list,1.841,1.842 In-Reply-To: <200604141238.k3ECcw87023732@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200604141238.k3ECcw87023732@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: Ville Skytta (scop) wrote: > Modified Files: > owners.list > Log Message: > Orphan carpej's packages, sponsorship revoked. Ouch. Do we dare ask for details? ;-) -- Rex From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 14 13:34:38 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 15:34:38 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <40489.192.54.193.51.1145011268.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <40489.192.54.193.51.1145011268.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20060414153438.60a057ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 12:41:08 +0200 (CEST), Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Could you add your proposition to the wiki ? No. And please don't do it for me either. This list is for discussion. The Wiki is for the final wording or draft thereof. The goal of this thread is to collect community input. > It's not the same one Jesse Keating proposed. Different enough in fact I > would accept it, but not the wiki one. The basic plan is the same, with a few things not being carved into stone yet. The terminology is different. End-of-life means a branch is dead. A dead branch, which is still updated, is not dead. We should be careful when and how to use the term "supported". The Wiki page also uses the term "expectations" and moves the responsibility for legacy updates onto the shoulders of the Security Response team, which is still work in progress, too. No packager can be forced/urged to update multiple legacy branches for an indeterminate period of time. So, policies are needed. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 14 13:34:41 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 15:34:41 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> Message-ID: <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 13:11:02 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > * With terms like "end-of-life", "life-cycle", "maintenance state" come > > promises with regard to the expectations raised by our users. It is > > important that we don't keep a legacy branch open just because parts of > > the contributor community insist on publishing updates for it, while the > > majority has moved on to do only the current branches. > > Why not? If a part of the community is willing to maintain a package, they > should be able to do it. That would be the "some do, some don't" playground. We try to move away from Fedora Extras being a second class citizen. We cannot do that as long as we lack a well-defined life-cycle compared with Fedora Core. And when we distinguish between active (i.e. maintained, "supported") branches, legacy branches and dead branches, we need policies which allow for improved security response times, e.g. through the work of a Fedora Extras security response team, which under well-defined conditions may touch packages in _all_ branches. Whether these are the same people who would maintain legacy branches, is an unimportant detail. And yes, we do need improved and stricter policies on how to handle orphaned packages. From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Fri Apr 14 13:39:06 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 09:39:06 -0400 Subject: owners owners.list,1.841,1.842 In-Reply-To: References: <200604141238.k3ECcw87023732@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1145021946.14377.21.camel@cutter> On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 08:31 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > Ville Skytta (scop) wrote: > > > Modified Files: > > owners.list > > Log Message: > > Orphan carpej's packages, sponsorship revoked. > > Ouch. Do we dare ask for details? ;-) Hadn't responded to his sponsor in over a month. -sv From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 14 13:56:22 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 15:56:22 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060414135622.GG4650@free.fr> > > Why not? If a part of the community is willing to maintain a package, they > > should be able to do it. > > That would be the "some do, some don't" playground. That's allready what is the extras project - within the policy constraints. To be more clearer, what is common is defined by the guidelines, everything else is "some do, some don't" and that's good. > We try to move away from Fedora Extras being a second class citizen. Fedora Extras isn't a second class citizen. Currently I think it is better that core for the quality of the packages, and the transparency of the package acceptance process and build process. Core may be better with regard with the security fix. But I don't have numbers on how fast the security issues are processed in extras and in core. > We cannot do that as long as we lack a well-defined life-cycle compared > with Fedora Core. And when we distinguish between active (i.e. maintained, I don't see why fedora extras would be a second class citizen if it hasn't a well-defined life-cycle. This seems unimportant with regard with other issues like packages cleaness, time to respond on bug reports, willing to track new things and completness of packages offer. > "supported") branches, legacy branches and dead branches, we need policies > which allow for improved security response times, e.g. through the work of > a Fedora Extras security response team, which under well-defined > conditions may touch packages in _all_ branches. Whether these are the > same people who would maintain legacy branches, is an unimportant detail. I agree, but this has nothing to do with the "some do, some don't" regarding maintaining or not packages for legacy branches. It is allready "some do, some don't" for 'supported' branches. It's a voluntary project, after all. > And yes, we do need improved and stricter policies on how to handle > orphaned packages. Agreed. -- Pat From rc040203 at freenet.de Fri Apr 14 14:06:59 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 16:06:59 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1145023620.12143.214.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 15:34 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 13:11:02 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > > > * With terms like "end-of-life", "life-cycle", "maintenance state" come > > > promises with regard to the expectations raised by our users. It is > > > important that we don't keep a legacy branch open just because parts of > > > the contributor community insist on publishing updates for it, while the > > > majority has moved on to do only the current branches. > > > > Why not? If a part of the community is willing to maintain a package, they > > should be able to do it. > > That would be the "some do, some don't" playground. Yes, and where is the problem? FE is a volunteered effort, so this is inevitable, even in FC(current). > We try to move away from Fedora Extras being a second class citizen. And how is this problem related to FE-EOL? The causes which let appear FE as a second class citizens are elsewhere. Wrt. this, IMO, FE-EOL policy is a marginal, negligible detail. > We cannot do that as long as we lack a well-defined life-cycle compared > with Fedora Core. Sorry, I don't see this connection. > And when we distinguish between active (i.e. maintained, > "supported") branches, legacy branches and dead branches, we need policies > which allow for improved security response times, Do we? People running an EOL'ed FC are running a "legacy maintained distro", i.e. already are on loose ground. > e.g. through the work of > a Fedora Extras security response team, which under well-defined > conditions may touch packages in _all_ branches. Whether these are the > same people who would maintain legacy branches, is an unimportant detail. Agreed, but I don't see how is this issue is connected to an FE-EOL policy? > And yes, we do need improved Yes. > and stricter policies on how to handle > orphaned packages. No, we need clearer policies and less narrow minded policies - I.e. "task forces" or "tag teams" or whatever you want to call it, i.e. teams, not egocentric individuals being keen on fencing up against the neighbor, as FE-policies current encourage it. Ralf From ed at eh3.com Fri Apr 14 14:50:55 2006 From: ed at eh3.com (Ed Hill) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 10:50:55 -0400 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> Message-ID: <1145026255.9001.320.camel@ernie> > > * During its legacy maintenance state, do we lock a branch, so that no > > new packages (i.e. packages which have not been in Fedora Extras before) > > may be added? With adding new packages to a legacy branch comes the > > promise to maintain those packages in that branch till end-of-life. Else +1, lets stop (or strongly discourage) new work in eol-ed versions > I think that it would be right to let packagers who want to to add new > packages, a packager that wants to add a version for eol fedora > versions shouldn't be discouraged to do so. But I also agree that it > should be accompanied by the promise to maintain the package for that > branch also, at least until he orphans the same package for all the fedora > versions that are not eol. > > In the same way I think that packagers shouldn't be discouraged to > update to the newest releases, and not only backport security fixes, if > the packager prefers that. And it doesn't cause too much deps issues, of > course. -1, I strongly disagree based upon end-user expectations I vote for consistency. That is, all packages within both FE and FC are eol-ed more-or-less simultaneously and are treated in a very similar manner. The overall trend here seems to be a convergence (or a blurring of the distinctions between) of FE and FC. Having different eol policy and/or practice within FE/FC (or different expectations on a per-package basis as Patrice suggests) is, IMO, a lot of confusion for very little gain. Expectations regarding bug/security fixes, updates, and other changes should (in an ideal world) to be communicated loudly, clearly, simply, and *consistently* to all end users. Muddying the waters with different per-package or per-repo or per-whatever behavior is not helpful. Ed -- Edward H. Hill III, PhD office: MIT Dept. of EAPS; Rm 54-1424; 77 Massachusetts Ave. Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 emails: eh3 at mit.edu ed at eh3.com URLs: http://web.mit.edu/eh3/ http://eh3.com/ phone: 617-253-0098 fax: 617-253-4464 From ville.skytta at iki.fi Fri Apr 14 14:55:54 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 17:55:54 +0300 Subject: owners owners.list,1.841,1.842 In-Reply-To: <1145021946.14377.21.camel@cutter> References: <200604141238.k3ECcw87023732@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <1145021946.14377.21.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1145026554.2821.68.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 09:39 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 08:31 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > > Ville Skytta (scop) wrote: > > > > > Modified Files: > > > owners.list > > > Log Message: > > > Orphan carpej's packages, sponsorship revoked. > > > > Ouch. Do we dare ask for details? ;-) > > Hadn't responded to his sponsor in over a month. And another month before that. That and the complete inactivity towards taking care of his stuff even earlier (not even rebuilds for FE5, no Bugzilla nor mailing list activity) made me think that I'd be better off not wasting time repeatedly poking him and desperately trying to sponsor. Revoking the sponsorship and placing the packages up for grabs should result in better future for those packages and their users as other interested parties will hopefully chime in. From kengert at redhat.com Fri Apr 14 15:01:41 2006 From: kengert at redhat.com (Kai Engert) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 17:01:41 +0200 Subject: Job failed on arch x86_64: couldn't download result files Message-ID: <443FB955.7040109@redhat.com> While this job seemed to have completed successfully with building, a failure occurred on the build system machines. Do you understand what's wrong? http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=7696 "Job failed on arch x86_64: couldn't download result files from builder 'https://hammer2.fedora.redhat.com:8888'. Please contact the build system administrator." Thanks in advance for having a look! Kai -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3248 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 14 15:21:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 11:21:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187932] Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604141521.k3EFLxTh018656@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187932 ------- Additional Comments From orion at cora.nwra.com 2006-04-14 11:21 EST ------- (In reply to comment #13) > The lins don't work(In reply to comment #12) > > http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/paraview.spec > > http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/paraview-2.4.3-5.src.rpm > > The links don't work. > Please try again. We were having some problems on our network. > > Just need the spec this time. Need to move the find to %install - cmake build > > process must muck with stuff is my only guess. > > You mean it isn't fixed with the fixes I propose in Comment #11? Not completely. The parenthesis are correct (thanks), but that alone didn't do it for me so I moved to the start of the install step and it seems to work there. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Fri Apr 14 16:28:14 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 17:28:14 +0100 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1145032094.3821.55.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > We cannot do that as long as we lack a well-defined life-cycle compared > with Fedora Core. And when we distinguish between active (i.e. maintained, > "supported") branches, legacy branches and dead branches, we need policies > which allow for improved security response times, e.g. through the work of > a Fedora Extras security response team, which under well-defined > conditions may touch packages in _all_ branches. Whether these are the > same people who would maintain legacy branches, is an unimportant detail. For what it's worth, here is what I think. 1. Anything > 2 branches before the release (so we still have support for 3 and 4) should be carried on with anything over 2 branches being consigned to Fedora Legacy. 2. Support should be primarily for the current and rawhide releases. Say anjuta didn't work for FC3. This would be annoying, but not as important as (say) getting some of my mono packages into FE. It will be fixed, just not urgently. If anjuta failed in FC4, it would have greater importance. Basically, it's strangling the older release of air. While some may say "can't do that", it is one way to get people onto newer releases (IMO) - don't knock the idea, it's what MS et al have done for years. 3. If a package is orphaned, it should be dropped totally after 6 months of no activity. If someone wants to bring it back in, it goes through the usual FE process. 4. The system for getting packages into other branches needs to be easier. If I've put version 1.3.4 of package x into rawhide FE and version 1.3.2 exists in FE5 and 1.2.4 in FE4, it should be 1.3.4 which supercedes everything else - a fresh import should not be required. This has the benefit of maintaining the older versions far simpler. 5. If a maintainer cannot be reached and newer versions of a package are available, there needs to be a mechanism for taking the package over in the short term initially and then permanently if the original maintainer can't be located and/or steps forward again > And yes, we do need improved and stricter policies on how to handle > orphaned packages. :-) TTFN Paul -- "Wenn eine gro?e Vision zu gro? ist, kann sie dich t?ten - du ?berschreitest deine Grenzen in der sicheren ?berzeugung, den vor dir liegenden Weg zu kennen." - Linus Torvals -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From wart at kobold.org Fri Apr 14 16:38:20 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Michael Thomas) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 09:38:20 -0700 Subject: Job failed on arch x86_64: couldn't download result files In-Reply-To: <443FB955.7040109@redhat.com> References: <443FB955.7040109@redhat.com> Message-ID: <443FCFFC.7080601@kobold.org> Kai Engert wrote: > While this job seemed to have completed successfully with building, a > failure occurred on the build system machines. > Do you understand what's wrong? > > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=7696 > > "Job failed on arch x86_64: couldn't download result files from builder > 'https://hammer2.fedora.redhat.com:8888'. > Please contact the build system administrator." I've had this problem before. Requeue the job usually fixes it. --Mike -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3820 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 14 16:41:03 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 18:41:03 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <1145023620.12143.214.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145023620.12143.214.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20060414184103.bcc26ecd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 16:06:59 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 15:34 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 13:11:02 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > > > > > * With terms like "end-of-life", "life-cycle", "maintenance state" come > > > > promises with regard to the expectations raised by our users. It is > > > > important that we don't keep a legacy branch open just because parts of > > > > the contributor community insist on publishing updates for it, while the > > > > majority has moved on to do only the current branches. > > > > > > Why not? If a part of the community is willing to maintain a package, they > > > should be able to do it. > > > > That would be the "some do, some don't" playground. > Yes, and where is the problem? The risk of FE becoming the infamous dumping ground of poorly maintained packages. > FE is a volunteered effort, so this is inevitable, even in FC(current). It's not black and white. By more and clear policies, volunteers can be given an environment in which it possible [and easier] to contribute where help is needed. And help is needed where bugzilla response times are high, where packagers lack test machines, where packagers discontinue support for legacy branches, where orphans are created, ... > > We try to move away from Fedora Extras being a second class citizen. > > And how is this problem related to FE-EOL? See the other replies. FC has a well-defined lifespan. FE has not. Fedora Legacy is a project with objectives. Point me to the place in the Wiki where I find the FE project objectives with regard to both the active and legacy releases. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Apr 14 16:42:05 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 12:42:05 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060414164205.376488001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 4 kasablanca-0.4.0.2-8.fc3.1 kdocker-1.3-6.fc3 kmymoney2-0.8.3-3.fc3 nethack-vultures-2.0.0-5.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Apr 14 16:43:57 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 12:43:57 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060414164357.92C2C8001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 11 amaya-9.4-4.fc4 ginac-1.3.4-1.fc4 gnochm-0.9.7-4.fc4 grace-5.1.19-5.fc4 kasablanca-0.4.0.2-8.fc4 kdemultimedia-extras-3.5.1-8.fc4 kdocker-1.3-6.fc4 kmymoney2-0.8.3-3.fc4 nethack-vultures-2.0.0-5.fc4 python-paramiko-1.5.3-1.fc4 seamonkey-1.0.1-1.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From frank-buettner at gmx.net Fri Apr 14 16:44:47 2006 From: frank-buettner at gmx.net (=?ISO-8859-15?Q?Frank_B=FCttner?=) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 18:44:47 +0200 Subject: Waiting for sponsor's Message-ID: <443FD17F.7030607@gmx.net> Can anyone tell me, how long does it take until to get an sponsor? Thanks. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 1747 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Apr 14 16:45:44 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 12:45:44 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060414164544.860AE8001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 21 amarok-1.4-0.12.beta3.fc5 amaya-9.4-1.fc5 amaya-9.4-4.fc5 ecl-0.9h-6.fc5 gcl-2.6.7-10.fc5 ginac-1.3.4-1.fc5 gnochm-0.9.7-4.fc5 gpsd-2.32-4.fc5 grace-5.1.19-5.fc5 kasablanca-0.4.0.2-8.fc5 kdemultimedia-extras-3.5.1-8.fc5 kdocker-1.3-6.fc5 kmymoney2-0.8.3-3.fc5 nethack-vultures-2.0.0-5.fc5 openvpn-2.1-0.10.beta14.fc5 python-paramiko-1.5.3-1.fc5 python-sqlite2-2.2.0-1.fc5 seamonkey-1.0.1-1.fc5 xmms-alarm-0.3.7-3.fc5 xmms-cdread-0.14-11.fc5 xmms-modplug-2.05-6.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Apr 14 16:49:24 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 12:49:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060414164924.650538001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 25 amarok-1.4-0.12.beta3.fc6 amaya-9.4-1.fc6 amaya-9.4-4.fc6 cernlib-2005-17.fc6.1 cernlib-2005-19.fc6 deskbar-applet-2.14.1-1.fc6 ginac-1.3.4-1.fc6 gpsd-2.32-4.fc6 grace-5.1.19-5.fc6 kasablanca-0.4.0.2-8.fc6 kdocker-1.3-6.fc6 kmymoney2-0.8.3-3.fc6 nethack-vultures-2.0.0-5.fc6 openvpn-2.1-0.10.beta14.fc6 perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple-0.12-2.fc6 perl-Module-Load-0.10-1.fc6 perl-Module-Load-Conditional-0.08-1.fc6 perl-Module-Loaded-0.01-1.fc6 perl-Params-Check-0.24-1.fc6 python-paramiko-1.5.3-1.fc6 python-sqlite2-2.2.0-1.fc6 shorewall-3.2.0-0.1.Beta4.fc6 wxGTK-2.6.3-2.6.3.2.0.fc6 wxPython-2.6.3.2-1.fc6 xmms-cdread-0.14-11.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 14 16:55:18 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 18:55:18 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <1145032094.3821.55.camel@T7.Linux> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145032094.3821.55.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <20060414185518.8f9b964e.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 17:28:14 +0100, Paul wrote: > 4. The system for getting packages into other branches needs to be > easier. If I've put version 1.3.4 of package x into rawhide FE and > version 1.3.2 exists in FE5 and 1.2.4 in FE4, it should be 1.3.4 which > supercedes everything else - a fresh import should not be required. This > has the benefit of maintaining the older versions far simpler. I've read this paragraph thrice, but fail to understand it. :( Are you saying that keeping the individual source rpm packages for every branch of FE in CVS is too complicated as it is done currently? Do you want upgrades/updates in "devel" CVS to propagate to the other branch directories automatically together with automatic build requests? =:-O Btw, a "fresh import" is never necessary. Every update can be done in CVS with ordinary "cvs" commands and the FE Makefile. From jamatos at fc.up.pt Fri Apr 14 17:13:27 2006 From: jamatos at fc.up.pt (Jose' Matos) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 18:13:27 +0100 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <1145026255.9001.320.camel@ernie> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <1145026255.9001.320.camel@ernie> Message-ID: <200604141813.27285.jamatos@fc.up.pt> On Friday 14 April 2006 15:50, Ed Hill wrote: > I vote for consistency. ?That is, all packages within both FE and FC are > eol-ed more-or-less simultaneously and are treated in a very similar > manner. ?The overall trend here seems to be a convergence (or a blurring > of the distinctions between) of FE and FC. ?Having different eol policy > and/or practice within FE/FC (or different expectations on a per-package > basis as Patrice suggests) is, IMO, a lot of confusion for very little > gain. +1 Unless it is a security update and it is done in the same spirit of FL... But then it is Fedora Extras Legacy... or even Fedora Legacy, why not? -- Jos? Ab?lio From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Fri Apr 14 17:14:38 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 18:14:38 +0100 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060414185518.8f9b964e.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145032094.3821.55.camel@T7.Linux> <20060414185518.8f9b964e.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1145034879.3821.62.camel@T7.Linux> On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 18:55 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 17:28:14 +0100, Paul wrote: > > > 4. The system for getting packages into other branches needs to be > > easier. If I've put version 1.3.4 of package x into rawhide FE and > > version 1.3.2 exists in FE5 and 1.2.4 in FE4, it should be 1.3.4 which > > supercedes everything else - a fresh import should not be required. This > > has the benefit of maintaining the older versions far simpler. > > I've read this paragraph thrice, but fail to understand it. :( Say I take on an orphaned package which upstream is at version 1.3. The orphaned version in FE 5 is 1.2.5 and for some reason, the version in FE 4 is 1.2. I build and commit 1.3 to rawhide and then add it to FE 5 and FE 4. What would be nice is for the request not to do a new import, but to drag the srpm from 1.3 and have that replace the versions in FE5 and FE4 after ditching the existing versions. Sorry if that was not clear - I am somewhat rushed today :-( TTFN Paul -- "Wenn eine gro?e Vision zu gro? ist, kann sie dich t?ten - du ?berschreitest deine Grenzen in der sicheren ?berzeugung, den vor dir liegenden Weg zu kennen." - Linus Torvals -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 14 17:10:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 13:10:40 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187964] Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604141710.k3EHAeVo004562@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187964 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-14 13:10 EST ------- The scoreboard for hack is now fixed to /var/games/hack/record. Now the ability to save games is broken in hack because it tries to write to /var/games/hack/save/ after it's dropped setgid. IMO, it shouldn't be storing save games there anyway. They should go in $HOME/.hack/. I'm working on another patch for that problem. http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/bsd-games-2.17-3.src.rpm http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/bsd-games.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From rc040203 at freenet.de Fri Apr 14 17:19:13 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 19:19:13 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060414184103.bcc26ecd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145023620.12143.214.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060414184103.bcc26ecd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1145035154.12143.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 18:41 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 16:06:59 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 15:34 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 13:11:02 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > > > > > > > * With terms like "end-of-life", "life-cycle", "maintenance state" come > > > > > promises with regard to the expectations raised by our users. It is > > > > > important that we don't keep a legacy branch open just because parts of > > > > > the contributor community insist on publishing updates for it, while the > > > > > majority has moved on to do only the current branches. > > > > > > > > Why not? If a part of the community is willing to maintain a package, they > > > > should be able to do it. > > > > > > That would be the "some do, some don't" playground. > > Yes, and where is the problem? > > The risk of FE becoming the infamous dumping ground of poorly maintained > packages. Face it: It already partially is - Such is the situation, no reason to complain about :-) > > FE is a volunteered effort, so this is inevitable, even in FC(current). > > It's not black and white. Agreed. > By more and clear policies, volunteers can be > given an environment in which it possible [and easier] to contribute where > help is needed. And help is needed where bugzilla response times are high, > where packagers lack test machines, where packagers discontinue support > for legacy branches, where orphans are created, ... ... "Tag teams"/"Task forces" .. set up a pool of volunteers to test packages on less common machines. > > > We try to move away from Fedora Extras being a second class citizen. > > > > And how is this problem related to FE-EOL? > > See the other replies. FC has a well-defined lifespan. It's not even close to be in community control nor in FE's. > FE has not. RH and FESCO have been using their powers to take arbitrary decisions, so why don't you do it again, if you feel there is a problem? > Fedora Legacy is a project with objectives. Legacy is a project of their own. They have the freedom to do what they want, so coordination with FE is _their_ problem, it isn't mine and actually isn't FE's. As I've said many times before, I don't see any sense in a separate Fedora Legacy project. To me, a "Fedora Legacy Team" within FE would be much more useful. Ralf From rc040203 at freenet.de Fri Apr 14 17:59:26 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 19:59:26 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <1145034879.3821.62.camel@T7.Linux> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145032094.3821.55.camel@T7.Linux> <20060414185518.8f9b964e.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145034879.3821.62.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <1145037566.12143.266.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 18:14 +0100, Paul wrote: > On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 18:55 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 17:28:14 +0100, Paul wrote: > > > > > 4. The system for getting packages into other branches needs to be > > > easier. If I've put version 1.3.4 of package x into rawhide FE and > > > version 1.3.2 exists in FE5 and 1.2.4 in FE4, it should be 1.3.4 which > > > supercedes everything else - a fresh import should not be required. This > > > has the benefit of maintaining the older versions far simpler. > > > > I've read this paragraph thrice, but fail to understand it. :( > > Say I take on an orphaned package which upstream is at version 1.3. The > orphaned version in FE 5 is 1.2.5 and for some reason, the version in FE > 4 is 1.2. I build and commit 1.3 to rawhide and then add it to FE 5 and > FE 4. What would be nice is for the request not to do a new import, As Michael said, this isn't necessary. > but > to drag the srpm from 1.3 and have that replace the versions in FE5 and > FE4 after ditching the existing versions. Just "diff" the files in FC(N+1) against the files in FC(N), apply the resulting patch to FC(N) and "cvs commit" them. That's all. Ralf From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 14 18:28:53 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 20:28:53 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <1145035154.12143.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145023620.12143.214.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060414184103.bcc26ecd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145035154.12143.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20060414202853.77165f0a.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 19:19:13 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > As I've said many times before, I don't see any sense in a separate > Fedora Legacy project. To me, a "Fedora Legacy Team" within FE would be > much more useful. Return to my initial message where I called it "Fedora Extras Legacy team". From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 14 18:37:23 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 20:37:23 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <1145034879.3821.62.camel@T7.Linux> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145032094.3821.55.camel@T7.Linux> <20060414185518.8f9b964e.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145034879.3821.62.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <20060414203723.13eb4f70.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 18:14:38 +0100, Paul wrote: > On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 18:55 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 17:28:14 +0100, Paul wrote: > > > > > 4. The system for getting packages into other branches needs to be > > > easier. If I've put version 1.3.4 of package x into rawhide FE and > > > version 1.3.2 exists in FE5 and 1.2.4 in FE4, it should be 1.3.4 which > > > supercedes everything else - a fresh import should not be required. This > > > has the benefit of maintaining the older versions far simpler. > > > > I've read this paragraph thrice, but fail to understand it. :( > > Say I take on an orphaned package which upstream is at version 1.3. The > orphaned version in FE 5 is 1.2.5 and for some reason, the version in FE > 4 is 1.2. I build and commit 1.3 to rawhide and then add it to FE 5 and > FE 4. What would be nice is for the request not to do a new import, but > to drag the srpm from 1.3 and have that replace the versions in FE5 and > FE4 after ditching the existing versions. > > Sorry if that was not clear - I am somewhat rushed today :-( You can simply copy the files within CVS from "devel" to the other branch directories. Or download the devel src.rpm and cvs-import.sh it if it is fully compatible and needs to modifications (e.g. BuildRequires). If, however, you mean to add some "magic" which takes the src.rpm built for Rawhide and sends this to the buildsys in order to build binaries for FE5 and older, this only complicates the maintenance. Who would add this to CVS? Who would ensure that the tags within CVS are proper, so at a later point you could return to old versions? From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 14 18:39:33 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 20:39:33 +0200 Subject: Waiting for sponsor's In-Reply-To: <443FD17F.7030607@gmx.net> References: <443FD17F.7030607@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060414203933.40cb7ba9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 18:44:47 +0200, Frank B?ttner wrote: > Can anyone tell me, how long does it take until to get an sponsor? What are the related bugzilla tickets? From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 14 19:32:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 15:32:35 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187964] Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604141932.k3EJWZqK001589@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187964 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-14 15:32 EST ------- I've fixed the 'hack' savefile problem and updated the -3 src rpm to contain the new patch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 14 19:56:29 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 19:56:29 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-14 Message-ID: <20060414195629.5995.59530@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch ====================================================================== New report for: dcbw AT redhat.com package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 ====================================================================== package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: pyxdg From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 14 19:56:35 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 19:56:35 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-14 Message-ID: <20060414195635.6022.14067@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch ====================================================================== New report for: dcbw AT redhat.com package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 14 19:56:43 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 19:56:43 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-14 Message-ID: <20060414195643.6028.57447@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== New report for: jeff AT ultimateevil.org package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 14 19:56:52 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 19:56:52 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-14 Message-ID: <20060414195652.6031.37926@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 Macaulay2-doc 0.9.2-22.fc6.i386 Macaulay2-emacs 0.9.2-17.fc4.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gparted 0.2.4-1.fc6.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 qtparted 0.4.5-4.fc5.i386 smart 0.41-30.fc6.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc Macaulay2-doc 0.9.2-22.fc6.ppc Macaulay2-emacs 0.9.2-17.fc4.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gparted 0.2.4-1.fc6.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc qtparted 0.4.5-4.fc5.ppc smart 0.41-30.fc6.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gparted 0.2.4-1.fc6.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 qtparted 0.4.5-4.fc5.x86_64 smart 0.41-30.fc6.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 wv 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== New report for: dakingun AT gmail.com package: gparted - 0.2.4-1.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libparted-1.6.so.14 package: gparted - 0.2.4-1.fc6.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libparted-1.6.so.14()(64bit) package: gparted - 0.2.4-1.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libparted-1.6.so.14 ====================================================================== New report for: steve AT silug.org package: qtparted - 0.4.5-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libparted-1.6.so.14 package: qtparted - 0.4.5-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libparted-1.6.so.14()(64bit) package: qtparted - 0.4.5-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libparted-1.6.so.14 ====================================================================== package: Macaulay2-doc - 0.9.2-22.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: Macaulay2-emacs - 0.9.2-17.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113 package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0()(64bit) libglade gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: Macaulay2-emacs - 0.9.2-17.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: Macaulay2-doc - 0.9.2-22.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: wv - 1.2.0-3.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgsf-1.so.113 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart From gajownik at fedora.pl Fri Apr 14 20:36:27 2006 From: gajownik at fedora.pl (Dawid Gajownik) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 22:36:27 +0200 Subject: Status of yakuake Message-ID: <444007CB.5050006@fedora.pl> Hi! When package can be considered orphaned? I'm asking about it because yakuake is not available in FE-5. This bug ? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186283 is more than 3 weeks old. I also wrote e-mail to current package maintainer 6 days ago but I did not get any answer so far :/ I use this app quite often so I would be willing to take it over :) Regards, Dawid -- ^_* From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Fri Apr 14 21:14:54 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 22:14:54 +0100 Subject: owners owners.list,1.841,1.842 In-Reply-To: <1145021946.14377.21.camel@cutter> References: <200604141238.k3ECcw87023732@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <1145021946.14377.21.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1145049294.3821.70.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > > Ouch. Do we dare ask for details? ;-) > > Hadn't responded to his sponsor in over a month. Are these classed as orphaned now and if they are, can someone update the wiki? TTFN Paul -- "Wenn eine gro?e Vision zu gro? ist, kann sie dich t?ten - du ?berschreitest deine Grenzen in der sicheren ?berzeugung, den vor dir liegenden Weg zu kennen." - Linus Torvals -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Fri Apr 14 21:29:17 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 22:29:17 +0100 Subject: fuse-emulator-cvs Message-ID: <1145050157.3821.73.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, The fuse-emulator package has a cvs version which would probably be suitable for FE rawhide rather than the 0.7 branch. What do I have to do to import it? Does it still need to go through the review procedure? TTFN Paul -- "Wenn eine gro?e Vision zu gro? ist, kann sie dich t?ten - du ?berschreitest deine Grenzen in der sicheren ?berzeugung, den vor dir liegenden Weg zu kennen." - Linus Torvals -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 14 22:10:27 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 00:10:27 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <1145026255.9001.320.camel@ernie> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <1145026255.9001.320.camel@ernie> Message-ID: <20060414221027.GA2355@free.fr> On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 10:50:55AM -0400, Ed Hill wrote: > > -1, I strongly disagree based upon end-user expectations > > I vote for consistency. That is, all packages within both FE and FC are Me too. Package before and after eol are handled similarly. Consistency for packagers is as important as consistency for users. And the consistency is a relative concept. I am for consistency between what is done for FE and FE eol. Some users might even have the same expectations than me. > eol-ed more-or-less simultaneously and are treated in a very similar > manner. The overall trend here seems to be a convergence (or a blurring > of the distinctions between) of FE and FC. Having different eol policy But there is a sharp distinction between fedora legacy and fedora core. The rules are completly different and completly different than those from extras. This is as difficult to explain than why the fedora legacy and fedora core are different. I have seen users complaining loudly in fedora legacy lists that the packages weren't updated. > and/or practice within FE/FC (or different expectations on a per-package > basis as Patrice suggests) is, IMO, a lot of confusion for very little > gain. It is not what I suggest: it is the current practice in fedora extras. And it is right. I don't think it makes sense to force packagers to act such that they fulfill the users expectations, because there are many users with many expectations just like there are many different packages in extra that fulfill very different needs. > Expectations regarding bug/security fixes, updates, and other changes > should (in an ideal world) to be communicated loudly, clearly, simply, > and *consistently* to all end users. Muddying the waters with different > per-package or per-repo or per-whatever behavior is not helpful. Having a fedora extras eol that works differently than fedora extras is muddying the waters. At some points I wanted to contribute to fedora legacy, thinking that it was more or less similar with fedora core or fedora extras but it is completly different. It is not an issue for fedora core vs legacy as these are different peoples (redhat/community) different infrastructures. But I don't think it is right for fedora extras vs fedora extras eol as these are the same people and same infrastructure. And fedora extras is allready very inhomogenous. -- Pat From ville.skytta at iki.fi Fri Apr 14 22:11:40 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 01:11:40 +0300 Subject: owners owners.list,1.841,1.842 In-Reply-To: <1145049294.3821.70.camel@T7.Linux> References: <200604141238.k3ECcw87023732@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <1145021946.14377.21.camel@cutter> <1145049294.3821.70.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <1145052700.2684.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 22:14 +0100, Paul wrote: > Hi, > > > > Ouch. Do we dare ask for details? ;-) > > > > Hadn't responded to his sponsor in over a month. > > Are these classed as orphaned now and if they are, can someone update > the wiki? They are, and the Wiki was already updated the same time as owners.list. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages?action=diff&rev2=255&rev1=254 From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Fri Apr 14 22:19:21 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 23:19:21 +0100 Subject: owners owners.list,1.841,1.842 In-Reply-To: <1145052700.2684.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <200604141238.k3ECcw87023732@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <1145021946.14377.21.camel@cutter> <1145049294.3821.70.camel@T7.Linux> <1145052700.2684.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1145053161.3821.77.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > > Are these classed as orphaned now and if they are, can someone update > > the wiki? > > They are, and the Wiki was already updated the same time as owners.list. > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages?action=diff&rev2=255&rev1=254 2006-xx-xx ;-) If anyone has the last known srpms (or even just the spec files), I'll look at taking them on. I have a few mates with thinkpads who could do with this sort of stuff. TTFN Paul -- "Wenn eine gro?e Vision zu gro? ist, kann sie dich t?ten - du ?berschreitest deine Grenzen in der sicheren ?berzeugung, den vor dir liegenden Weg zu kennen." - Linus Torvals -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 14 22:20:37 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 00:20:37 +0200 Subject: fuse-emulator-cvs In-Reply-To: <1145050157.3821.73.camel@T7.Linux> References: <1145050157.3821.73.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <20060414222036.GB2355@free.fr> On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 10:29:17PM +0100, Paul wrote: > Hi, > > The fuse-emulator package has a cvs version which would probably be > suitable for FE rawhide rather than the 0.7 branch. What do I have to do > to import it? Does it still need to go through the review procedure? No you don't. The process itself is sketched here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsingCvsFaq#head-192dbe7a1e9b114afc81d0a3753a00f9cfa70bbe You should try to make sure that you still follow the guidelines. Normally people are looking at the cvs commits for the packages they are interested in. You can ask for a review, however if you feel it is needed. -- Pat From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Fri Apr 14 22:22:09 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 00:22:09 +0200 Subject: FE QA SIG update Message-ID: <200604142222.k3EMML1b026340@mx3.redhat.com> Hi folks, I have updated the QA SIG's wiki page, to try to flesh out things a bit: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/QA Please have a look and feel free to update/amend as needed ('tis getting pretty late here, so I'm not sure what percentage of my brain is still in gear... :-) ) And of course, please do join us if you feel so inclined. Cheers, Christian From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 14 22:33:49 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 00:33:49 +0200 Subject: owners owners.list,1.841,1.842 In-Reply-To: <1145053161.3821.77.camel@T7.Linux> References: <200604141238.k3ECcw87023732@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <1145021946.14377.21.camel@cutter> <1145049294.3821.70.camel@T7.Linux> <1145052700.2684.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1145053161.3821.77.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <20060415003349.8429e2d1.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 23:19:21 +0100, Paul wrote: > Hi, > > > > Are these classed as orphaned now and if they are, can someone update > > > the wiki? > > > > They are, and the Wiki was already updated the same time as owners.list. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages?action=diff&rev2=255&rev1=254 > > 2006-xx-xx ;-) > > If anyone has the last known srpms (or even just the spec files), I'll > look at taking them on. I have a few mates with thinkpads who could do > with this sort of stuff. It's all in Fedora Extras CVS. From steve at silug.org Fri Apr 14 22:38:41 2006 From: steve at silug.org (Steven Pritchard) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 17:38:41 -0500 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-14 In-Reply-To: <20060414195652.6031.37926@faldor.intranet> References: <20060414195652.6031.37926@faldor.intranet> Message-ID: <20060414223840.GA8153@osiris.silug.org> On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 07:56:52PM -0000, Michael Schwendt wrote: > ====================================================================== > New report for: steve AT silug.org > > package: qtparted - 0.4.5-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 > unresolved deps: > libparted-1.6.so.14 > > package: qtparted - 0.4.5-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 > unresolved deps: > libparted-1.6.so.14()(64bit) > > package: qtparted - 0.4.5-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc > unresolved deps: > libparted-1.6.so.14 So parted was updated, but the version number on the library went down? $ repoquery --repoid=development --provides parted libparted-1.6.so.13()(64bit) parted = 1.6.25.1-1 Isn't that a bit odd? I'm fine rebuilding if necessary, but something looks broken to me... Steve -- Steven Pritchard - K&S Pritchard Enterprises, Inc. Email: steve at kspei.com http://www.kspei.com/ Phone: (618)398-3000 Mobile: (618)567-7320 From vic_sk at yahoo.com Fri Apr 14 22:59:53 2006 From: vic_sk at yahoo.com (Victor Skovorodnikov) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 15:59:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <1144167489.2898.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi all, Okay, so between the not so related to programming full-time work, I've made some improvements to my 2D shooter game "Maximum Destruction" AND have been in touch with Mr. Paul Riche III (original SC2 designer) and UR Quan Masters development team. Both of them allowed me to use the SC2 game images in Fedora's "Extras" portion for free and non-commercial purposes only. I've added sound FX to my game, expanded game area, and did some more debugging. The improved version is on my site at: www.victorsk.webhop.org My next step will be to add menus and preferences using wxWidgets. Please feel free to download and play the current version. I welcome any ideas/feedback you may have to improve it - I want it to be the best possible version for the "Extras" and any advice on how to improve it is certainly welcomed. Thank you. I'll keep you infomed of my progress, Victor. Ville Skytt? wrote: On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 13:20 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > > Kevin Kofler wrote: > >> Greetings, I've just finished a 2D shooter game "Space Invaders" [...] > >> The game can be downloaded as either source or binary from my site at: > >> www.victorsk.webhop.org > > [snip] > > > > FYI, Star Control 2 (which you mention on the game's site as the source for > > your graphics) hasn't been forgotten. It has been GPLed and renamed to "Ur-Quan > > Masters" because of trademark licensing issues (the people who own the game's > > code only had a license to the "Star Control" trademark and so couldn't use it > > for the GPL release), and it's even available in Extras (yum install uqm). In > > other words, you're lucky because this means you'll probably get away with > > "borrowing" its graphics for your game. > > > > Kevin Kofler > > Good catch, Victor this does mean that your code must be licensed under > the GPL. >From uqm's COPYING: The content -- voiceovers, dialogue, graphics, and music -- are copyright (C) 1992, 1993, 2002 Toys for Bob, Inc. or their respective creators. The content may be copied freely as part of a distribution of The Ur-Quan Masters. All other rights are reserved. (Side Note: The content will become more freely redistributable and reusable in later releases.) Note "as part of a distribution of The Ur-Quan Masters". -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list --------------------------------- How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low PC-to-Phone call rates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Apr 14 23:04:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 19:04:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187964] Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604142304.k3EN4L6R004182@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187964 ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-14 19:04 EST ------- Ugh. I overlooked a couple of games in this package that are still setgid but don't drop setgid correctly: bsd-tetris, phantasia, and sail. Time to dig around in the code again... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Fri Apr 14 23:24:11 2006 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 04:54:11 +0530 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 15:59 -0700, Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > Hi all, > > Okay, so between the not so related to programming full-time work, > I've made some improvements to my 2D shooter game "Maximum > Destruction" AND have been in touch with Mr. Paul Riche III (original > SC2 designer) and UR Quan Masters development team. > > Both of them allowed me to use the SC2 game images in Fedora's > "Extras" portion for free and non-commercial purposes only. Thats incompatible with Fedora packaging guidelines. A written license should be included that is Free and/or open source is required. Rahul From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 00:06:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 20:06:34 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187430] Review Request: elektra In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604150006.k3F06YZl014815@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: elektra https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187430 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-14 20:06 EST ------- (In reply to comment #9) > > * DTDVERSION isn't usefull > > Its being used in a %post script. Kept. It is used only once, so it is better to replace by the value. > > * You don't use macros like %{_bindir} and the like. This is mandatory > > Thats because for correct usage of this package, it is mandatory to install > files in /bin and /lib (and not /usr/bin and /usr/lib) and according to > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/RPMMacros there are no macros that satisfy > this. Any other places that macros are available, they are being used. Ok. But %{_lib} should be used too, it is lib64 sometimes, so /lib should be replaced by /%{_lib} Also the macros should be used in %install too. > > * the %clean section is wrong > > Fixed. No, the following line should be uncommented: rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > > * %deffatr is not standard > > I think it is fixed. Documentation isn't clear about the standard way of using > it. It is indeed fixed. > > * the devel and main package aren't set up how they should be. > > Not sure what you mean. They look good for me. the .so files should be in the devel package. It is usual to have, in the main package something like /lib/*elektra-filesys.so.* and in -devel: /lib/*elektra-filesys.so Same for /lib/*berkeleydb.so* Then devel should Requires: elektra-backend-berkeleydb = %{version}-%{release} > > * Why not use %configure? > > Because of the same reason %{_bindir} is not being used. Red Hat's %configure > forces a /usr/bin and /usr/lib, which is wrong for this package. Couldn't it be possible to use %configure and override the default flags by adding them in the end? Otherwise you'll have to set CFLAGS to $RPM_OPT_FLAGS. > We don't have a smaller changelog because we are building RPMs since the > beginning. The packaging is tightly integrated to the build system and the > changelog is automatically being appended to the specfile. Can we just leave a > better, more complete changelog this way ? No. It is much too verbose. Leave only the packaging infos, not everything. Sometime little is better... * The Version is wrong, should be 0.6. The Source may be then Source: http://dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/elektra/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz * libtool and gettext-devel are certainly not needed. * ldconfig call is needed for backend-berkeleydb too * rpmlint reports (among others) E: elektra binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /bin/kdb ['//lib'] * the %post action should only be done for the first install? In that case look at how to achieve that in scriptlet snippets. * The paragraph that appear in the elektra main package description shouldn't appear in the other subpackages summaries. * It is only an advice, and not a blocker, but I prefer listing files in bindir using the full names and not globs, such that it is easier to catch mistakes. * Also not a blocker, but I believe it would be clearer to have %{_datadir}/sgml/elektra-0.1.1/ * Some doc files are missing, like %docs AUTHORS COPYING NEWS README -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From vic_sk at yahoo.com Sat Apr 15 00:54:43 2006 From: vic_sk at yahoo.com (Victor Skovorodnikov) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 17:54:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060415005443.50940.qmail@web32606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Rahul Sundaram wrote:Thats incompatible with Fedora packaging guidelines. A written license should be included that is Free and/or open source is required. Should I get this written license from Paul Riche III, UR Quan Masters developers or can I write it myself? Sorry, I am really quite new to this licensing stuff. www.victorsk.webhop.org Thanks, Victor. --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 00:59:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 20:59:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188351] Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604150059.k3F0xEVp024005@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188351 fedora.wickert at arcor.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert at arcor.de 2006-04-14 20:59 EST ------- REVIEW for f8cf9167b19c07f202d2d5e31431648a gphpedit-0.9.80-2.src.rpm Good: - rpmlint clean except for one zero-length error (see below) - package and specfile naming according to Package Naming Guidelines - package meets Packaging Guidlines - license ok (GPL) - license field in specfile machtes actual license - license included in source and correctly installed in %doc - specfile written in American English - specfile legible. Actually that's what specs look like! :-) Clean and well commented. - source matches upstream - package builds into binaries in Fedora Core 5 i386 - no locales to worry about - no shared libs - relocatable - package owns all directories it creates - package doesn't own files or dirs already owned by other packages - no duplicates in %files listing - permissions of files ok, %defattr correct - %clean section present and correct - macro usage consistent - code, not content - no large docs - docs don't affect runtime - no headers, pkgconfigs or static libs to worry about - no libtool archives - desktop file included and correctly installed - package builds in mock for Core 5 i386 - program works fine, package has been testet for more than a week without problems - changelog information correct and detailed APPROVED You can now import the srpm into CVS, but there are four things you need to fix before building: - remove gtk2-devel from BuildRequires. It's a duplicate as it's already required both by gtkhtml2-devel and libgnomeui-devel. The rest of the Requires and BuildRequires are correct, none of the exceptions listed in the wiki. - remove empty NEWS from %doc to fix this rpmlint error. > rpmlint gphpedit-0.9.80-2.fc5.i386.rpm > E: gphpedit zero-length /usr/share/doc/gphpedit-0.9.80/NEWS - remove generic INSTALL from %doc (not needed) - please add the URL for Source0 when you receive feedback from upstream -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From michael at knox.net.nz Sat Apr 15 01:10:42 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 13:10:42 +1200 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> Message-ID: <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 15:59 -0700, Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Okay, so between the not so related to programming full-time work, >> I've made some improvements to my 2D shooter game "Maximum >> Destruction" AND have been in touch with Mr. Paul Riche III (original >> SC2 designer) and UR Quan Masters development team. >> >> Both of them allowed me to use the SC2 game images in Fedora's >> "Extras" portion for free and non-commercial purposes only. > > Thats incompatible with Fedora packaging guidelines. A written license > should be included that is Free and/or open source is required. > My understanding was that you only *had* to provide a written license if the upstream supplied one. I could be wrong tho.... My libedit package is an example of this, no upstream license, but its been approved and is currently packaged with out a license file. I would recommend that Victor requests a license to be provided in the future (I did this for libedit), but the written license is only required if one is already supplied. Michael From lists at timj.co.uk Sat Apr 15 01:13:48 2006 From: lists at timj.co.uk (Tim Jackson) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 02:13:48 +0100 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <20060415005443.50940.qmail@web32606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060415005443.50940.qmail@web32606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <444048CC.4090004@timj.co.uk> Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > */Rahul Sundaram /* wrote: > > Thats incompatible with Fedora packaging guidelines. A written license > should be included that is Free and/or open source is required. > > > Should I get this written license from Paul Riche III, UR Quan Masters > developers or can I write it myself? You need to get it from him; as the author, he is the only person that can set the licensing terms. And in case you missed the subtlety in Rahul's message, it's not the "written license should be included" bit which is so much of a problem (though you should indeed include a text file with the package containing the license as written by the author). The main problem is the fact that the license he gave you isn't a Free software license and is therefore still incompatible with Fedora. ("free for non-commercial purposes" isn't Free in this context; we're talking about freedom not free-from-charge here; see: http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-76294f12c6b481792eb001ba9763d95e2792e825 and, for some background: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html ) Tim P.S. OT: The destination anchors generated by the wiki suck. 40 random hex digits is just ridiculous for uniqueness within a page. ".../Guidelines#Licensing" would be much more appropriate. Is this possible? From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 02:04:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 22:04:35 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188351] Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604150204.k3F24Zck000350@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188351 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at timj.co.uk 2006-04-14 22:04 EST ------- Thanks very much for the review Christoph. Imported into CVS; the first build failed on x86_64 (http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=7737) so I will look into that. At a first glance it looks like something fishy upstream with precompiled libraries bundled in the source tarball, so the spec may need revisiting to rebuild those properly and appropriately for the arch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 03:16:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 23:16:02 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188180] Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604150316.k3F3G2RE010158@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180 ------- Additional Comments From nomis80 at nomis80.org 2006-04-14 23:15 EST ------- There's a typo in the summary of qt-config. Also, how about using -no-exceptions and sedding -fexceptions out of $RPM_OPT_FLAGS? Qt (and KDE 4 eventually) would be smaller and faster. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From frank-buettner at gmx.net Sat Apr 15 06:26:28 2006 From: frank-buettner at gmx.net (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Frank_B=FCttner?=) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 08:26:28 +0200 Subject: Waiting for sponsor's In-Reply-To: <20060414203933.40cb7ba9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <443FD17F.7030607@gmx.net> <20060414203933.40cb7ba9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <44409214.8060302@gmx.net> It is the 188369 or short https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 1747 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From gauret at free.fr Sat Apr 15 07:01:46 2006 From: gauret at free.fr (Aurelien Bompard) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 09:01:46 +0200 Subject: Waiting for sponsor's References: <443FD17F.7030607@gmx.net> <20060414203933.40cb7ba9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <44409214.8060302@gmx.net> Message-ID: Frank B?ttner wrote: > It is the 188369 or short > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 According to the process http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors#head-bb3314e7b80fd98f037edd46f6d1efafbb611752 your package must be approved before you can apply for membership in Extras. Cheers, Aur?lien -- http://aurelien.bompard.org ~~~~ Jabber : abompard at jabber.fr "Science sans conscience n'est que ruine de l'?me." -- Rabelais From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 15 07:23:57 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 09:23:57 +0200 Subject: Howto become a sponser? Message-ID: <44409F8D.9040808@hhs.nl> Hi, I was wondering what one has todo to become a sponsor? Now one may wonder why I would like to become a sponsor: 1) I have a dream where every OSS/free software package is just a yum install away. Sofar I have been working towards this dream by packaging myself, but a few days ago I had this revelation that I will never be able to fulfill my dream on my own, thus that it would be a good idea to spend some of my time, coaching others into becoming FE contributers too. Combine this revelation with the recent sounds on the mailinglist that the needs sponsor queue is growing and I've decided that its time for me to chip in. 2) I'm a computer science teacher on a university and sofar I've been successful in luring some of my students away from the darkside to Fedora and now some of them are ready and willing to become FE contributers, since I see most of them person to person for many hours a week it would be ideal if I could sponsor them. Regards, Hans From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 15 07:25:28 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 09:25:28 +0200 Subject: Waiting for sponsor's In-Reply-To: References: <443FD17F.7030607@gmx.net> <20060414203933.40cb7ba9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <44409214.8060302@gmx.net> Message-ID: <44409FE8.5060809@hhs.nl> Aurelien Bompard wrote: > Frank B?ttner wrote: >> It is the 188369 or short >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 > > According to the process > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors#head-bb3314e7b80fd98f037edd46f6d1efafbb611752 > your package must be approved before you can apply for membership in Extras. > Usually the sponsor also does the review of the first package, so in order to get your first package approved one still needs a sponsor AFAIK, so in essence I don't see the difference. Regards, Hans From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 15 07:29:43 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 09:29:43 +0200 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <444048CC.4090004@timj.co.uk> References: <20060415005443.50940.qmail@web32606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <444048CC.4090004@timj.co.uk> Message-ID: <4440A0E7.9080804@hhs.nl> Tim Jackson wrote: > Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: >> */Rahul Sundaram /* wrote: >> >> Thats incompatible with Fedora packaging guidelines. A written >> license >> should be included that is Free and/or open source is required. >> >> >> Should I get this written license from Paul Riche III, UR Quan Masters >> developers or can I write it myself? > > You need to get it from him; as the author, he is the only person that > can set the licensing terms. And in case you missed the subtlety in > Rahul's message, it's not the "written license should be included" bit > which is so much of a problem (though you should indeed include a text > file with the package containing the license as written by the author). > The main problem is the fact that the license he gave you isn't a Free > software license and is therefore still incompatible with Fedora. > > ("free for non-commercial purposes" isn't Free in this context; we're > talking about freedom not free-from-charge here; see: > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-76294f12c6b481792eb001ba9763d95e2792e825 > > > and, for some background: > > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html > > ) > To be more exact, we're talking about images here, so content not code, thus you only need a license which allows free (gratis and unlimited) redistribution of the images with your game. This still means that the non-commercial clause is unacceptable though. Also where did you get the sound FX? those need to be properly licensed too. Regards, Hans From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 15 07:43:18 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 09:43:18 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> Message-ID: <4440A416.5010007@hhs.nl> Patrice Dumas wrote: >> A few problems need to be discussed and solved: >> >> * When a release of Fedora Core becomes legacy, not seldomly a Fedora >> Extras package maintainer moves on to the current or latest release of >> Fedora Core and stops preparing/testing/publishing updates for the legacy >> versions. Since not every package maintainer would "support" old legacy >> branches, we need a way to mark individual package branches as "free for >> adoption by Fedora Extras Legacy". With this comes the need to monitor > > Maybe, before adoption by fedora extras legacy team, it should be possible > to have a possibility for individual contributors that are interested > in older branches of the project to take over maintainance of the older > branches. This could simply achieved by saying so to the maintainer of > the active branches and adding oneself to the owners.list to get the bugs > for that package, import the cvs package and work only on the old branches. > +1 (yes thats all I have to say). >> corresponding bugzilla tickets of specific branches. It may be necessary >> to give legacy branches of Fedora Extras a new "Product" name in bugzilla, >> so a default package owner can be different compared with the primary >> owner for active releases. > > I don't think it is really needed in many cases, unless the primary owner > don't want to get the bugs of the older releases. As long as he doesn't > have to fix them I think he won't mind receiving the bug reports. I am > more for a comaintainership with verbal agreement on who do what. > +1 (yes thats all I have to say). Regards, Hans From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 15 07:46:31 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 09:46:31 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060414153438.60a057ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <40489.192.54.193.51.1145011268.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060414153438.60a057ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <4440A4D7.9050602@hhs.nl> Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 12:41:08 +0200 (CEST), Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > >> Could you add your proposition to the wiki ? > > No. And please don't do it for me either. This list is for discussion. The > Wiki is for the final wording or draft thereof. The goal of this thread is > to collect community input. > >> It's not the same one Jesse Keating proposed. Different enough in fact I >> would accept it, but not the wiki one. > > The basic plan is the same, with a few things not being carved into stone > yet. The terminology is different. End-of-life means a branch is dead. A > dead branch, which is still updated, is not dead. We should be careful > when and how to use the term "supported". The Wiki page also uses the term > "expectations" and moves the responsibility for legacy updates onto the > shoulders of the Security Response team, which is still work in progress, > too. No packager can be forced/urged to update multiple legacy branches for > an indeterminate period of time. So, policies are needed. > As someone who _was_ involved in discussions around the Security team, let me say that this (the wiki wording) is a _BAD_ idea, the primary mode of operation should be that maintainers try to maintain their packages for older releases, not that everything gets just dropped on the shoulders of the Security Team. That said I do like the co-maintainer idea a lot, a default mode of operations where the solution is let the Security Team fix it will only result in no one wanting to be part of the Security Team. Regards, Hans From vic_sk at yahoo.com Sat Apr 15 07:51:23 2006 From: vic_sk at yahoo.com (Victor Skovorodnikov) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 00:51:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <4440A0E7.9080804@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <20060415075123.92641.qmail@web32606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Thank you very much for the clarification. I'll get right on it. Victor. --- Hans de Goede wrote: > > > Tim Jackson wrote: > > Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > >> */Rahul Sundaram /* wrote: > >> > >> Thats incompatible with Fedora packaging guidelines. A written > >> license > >> should be included that is Free and/or open source is required. > >> > >> > >> Should I get this written license from Paul Riche III, UR Quan Masters > >> developers or can I write it myself? > > > > You need to get it from him; as the author, he is the only person that > > can set the licensing terms. And in case you missed the subtlety in > > Rahul's message, it's not the "written license should be included" bit > > which is so much of a problem (though you should indeed include a text > > file with the package containing the license as written by the author). > > The main problem is the fact that the license he gave you isn't a Free > > software license and is therefore still incompatible with Fedora. > > > > ("free for non-commercial purposes" isn't Free in this context; we're > > talking about freedom not free-from-charge here; see: > > > > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-76294f12c6b481792eb001ba9763d95e2792e825 > > > > > > > and, for some background: > > > > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html > > > > ) > > > > To be more exact, we're talking about images here, so content not code, > thus you only need a license which allows free (gratis and unlimited) > redistribution of the images with your game. This still means that the > non-commercial clause is unacceptable though. Also where did you get the > sound FX? those need to be properly licensed too. > > Regards, > > Hans > > > -- > fedora-extras-list mailing list > fedora-extras-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 15 08:12:57 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 10:12:57 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <1145035154.12143.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145023620.12143.214.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060414184103.bcc26ecd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145035154.12143.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <4440AB09.6030907@hhs.nl> Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 18:41 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: >> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 16:06:59 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 15:34 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: >>>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 13:11:02 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: >>>> >>>>>> * With terms like "end-of-life", "life-cycle", "maintenance state" come >>>>>> promises with regard to the expectations raised by our users. It is >>>>>> important that we don't keep a legacy branch open just because parts of >>>>>> the contributor community insist on publishing updates for it, while the >>>>>> majority has moved on to do only the current branches. >>>>> Why not? If a part of the community is willing to maintain a package, they >>>>> should be able to do it. >>>> That would be the "some do, some don't" playground. >>> Yes, and where is the problem? >> The risk of FE becoming the infamous dumping ground of poorly maintained >> packages. > Face it: It already partially is - Such is the situation, no reason to > complain about :-) > That is not entirely fair, there always will be periods when a maintainer doesn't have time. The current if a maintainer doesn't do a timely rebuild for a new Release orphan it, is one mechanism for shaking out the real orphans and maybe we need another mechanism next to thayt, but saying that FE is a dumping ground is unfair. Debian has far more ancient packages (using ancient versus upstream as a maintainence measurement here) then FE. Also even core has packages which lack maintainance by this standard check out lm_sensors for example. Regards, Hans From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Sat Apr 15 08:17:28 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 09:17:28 +0100 Subject: Waiting for sponsor's In-Reply-To: <44409FE8.5060809@hhs.nl> References: <443FD17F.7030607@gmx.net> <20060414203933.40cb7ba9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <44409214.8060302@gmx.net> <44409FE8.5060809@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1145089048.3821.84.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > Usually the sponsor also does the review of the first package, so in > order to get your first package approved one still needs a sponsor > AFAIK, so in essence I don't see the difference. Sponsors are people that the FESCO bods believe have a strong enough grasp and proven track record to be moved above mere packagers. They are few and should be revered from on high. Their paths should be paved with rose petals and nought but finest mead be presented for their pallets. Now will *someone* please do the check on my mono packages! Now nrpms has gone, there is a vacuum which needs filling. TTFN Paul -- "Wenn eine gro?e Vision zu gro? ist, kann sie dich t?ten - du ?berschreitest deine Grenzen in der sicheren ?berzeugung, den vor dir liegenden Weg zu kennen." - Linus Torvals -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From gauret at free.fr Sat Apr 15 08:18:58 2006 From: gauret at free.fr (Aurelien Bompard) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 10:18:58 +0200 Subject: Howto become a sponser? References: <44409F8D.9040808@hhs.nl> Message-ID: Hans de Goede wrote: > I was wondering what one has todo to become a sponsor? See the second part of: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SponsorProcess IIRC, a new sponsor is elected every week in a Steering Comittee IRC meeting. It can't hurt to let them know you are a candidate though, as you've just done. Aur?lien -- http://aurelien.bompard.org ~~~~ Jabber : abompard at jabber.fr "When you're new to computers, you think they're magic. Then you learn some stuff and think you understand them. Then you learn more and realize they're basically magic." From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 08:15:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 04:15:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604150815.k3F8Fv5s027168@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-15 04:15 EST ------- I'm willing todo a review on this, but I cannot sponsor you, finding a sponsor with a fully reviewed package should be easier though. Also I have some experience with ctapi but I don't have the cardreader this lib is for so I'll have to believe you on your blue eyes that this thing actually works, or you can send me a reader if you have a spare one :) Does this sound ok to you? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sat Apr 15 08:24:37 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 10:24:37 +0200 Subject: dejavu 2.5 in Fedora Extras Message-ID: <1145089480.2578.9.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Hi, I'll be out of town for a week starting now, which means I won't be there to do the dejavu 2.5 FE release tomorrow. If a FE maintainer does not want to wait till the 23 for a FE release, permission is hereby granted to do it in my stead (just send me a mail so I don't discover it in the CVS when returning) Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 08:23:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 04:23:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187964] Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604150823.k3F8NxX5028723@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187964 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-15 04:23 EST ------- I don't like the putting the highscore file in a dir under /var/games which hack currently does with: /var/games/hack/record Since the save games will no longer be in the /var/games/hack dir, I see no use for a directory, could you change the highscore file to /var/games/hack.hs or hack.record please? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 08:26:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 04:26:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604150826.k3F8QNjG029065@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 ------- Additional Comments From frank-buettner at gmx.net 2006-04-15 04:26 EST ------- Yes. I have this reader and testet it with Fedora 4 and 5. So this package will work:) I use the ctapi to write apps that use chipcards. I have build this package because this reader is very often use in germany. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 15 09:02:34 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 11:02:34 +0200 Subject: Howto become a sponser? In-Reply-To: References: <44409F8D.9040808@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <20060415110234.e8ad97a4.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 10:18:58 +0200, Aurelien Bompard wrote: > Hans de Goede wrote: > > I was wondering what one has todo to become a sponsor? > > See the second part of: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SponsorProcess > IIRC, a new sponsor is elected every week in a Steering Comittee IRC > meeting. > > It can't hurt to let them know you are a candidate though, as you've just > done. Yes, self-nominations may be vital. The same applies to FESCO membership. We believe that possibly there are contributors, who would like to be active members of FESCO, but who just don't know how to be become a member. How to select/elect FESCO members is a topic that has come up recently and might be taken onto this list, too. From vic_sk at yahoo.com Sat Apr 15 08:33:57 2006 From: vic_sk at yahoo.com (Victor Skovorodnikov) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 01:33:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Contribution to Extras (Re: sounds) In-Reply-To: <4440A0E7.9080804@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <20060415083357.49101.qmail@web32602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi all, I have attempted to contact the site's administrators at this address: amazingsounds at iespana.es from which I obtained the sounds, but their email is invalid. However, on their site at: http://amazingsounds.iespana.es/en/ it states that: The place where you will find all kinds of WAV files...WAV Sounds for you to download, FREE!! ... Our content is made basically for multimedia developers or creators that want to use these files ... Do I still need to get in touch with them somehow or does this notice imply free redistribution of their sounds? I guess when it comes to such things, it becomes a little vague. Thanks, Victor. Hans de Goede wrote: Tim Jackson wrote: > Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: >> */Rahul Sundaram /* wrote: >> >> Thats incompatible with Fedora packaging guidelines. A written >> license >> should be included that is Free and/or open source is required. >> >> >> Should I get this written license from Paul Riche III, UR Quan Masters >> developers or can I write it myself? > > You need to get it from him; as the author, he is the only person that > can set the licensing terms. And in case you missed the subtlety in > Rahul's message, it's not the "written license should be included" bit > which is so much of a problem (though you should indeed include a text > file with the package containing the license as written by the author). > The main problem is the fact that the license he gave you isn't a Free > software license and is therefore still incompatible with Fedora. > > ("free for non-commercial purposes" isn't Free in this context; we're > talking about freedom not free-from-charge here; see: > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-76294f12c6b481792eb001ba9763d95e2792e825 > > > and, for some background: > > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html > > ) > To be more exact, we're talking about images here, so content not code, thus you only need a license which allows free (gratis and unlimited) redistribution of the images with your game. This still means that the non-commercial clause is unacceptable though. Also where did you get the sound FX? those need to be properly licensed too. Regards, Hans -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list --------------------------------- Love cheap thrills? Enjoy PC-to-Phone calls to 30+ countries for just 2?/min with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 15 09:43:21 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 11:43:21 +0200 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? Message-ID: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, If you point your browser at: http://fedoraproject.org/extras/5/i386/repodata/repoview/games.group.html Then you see that many packages are listed twice (previous and current release) I concider this a bug, where should I report this? Regards, Hans -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEQMA547KA3t5s3+8RAubjAJ9enrMqd8BHMm7g9g5+rd8iuKvchwCgrPy4 xeS8+hrsG2LnrTSQWvPguRc= =S+jf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From pertusus at free.fr Sat Apr 15 10:23:41 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 12:23:41 +0200 Subject: RFC: co-maintainership, bug and package appropriation Message-ID: <20060415102341.GA2340@free.fr> Hello, This is a very long mail, sorry, but I thing the issue deserves it. I think that the question of co-maintainership, bug responsiveness and the related issue of bug apropriation, package maintainership and orphaning are very important and are slowing down extras. These issues have already been risen repeatedly, but I think there was no agreement, although there were interesting discussions. And it pollutes a lot the debate on fedora extras eol versus non eol so I think it deserves a specific thread, now. I will first define co-maintainership, then propose some rules to help ameliorate responsivness on bugs, some rules for other package issues, and last, rules for stalled reviews. I suppose that a set of trusted contributors exists, I think that currently it could be the sponsors. Later members of the security sig could be added. I also use the term maintainer for the primary maintainer of a package. 1. Co-maintainership ==================== I think we should formally allow for co-maintainership. The primary maintainer can add co-mainatainers. He may revoke them at any time too. The things that the co-maintainer is entitled to do are decided by the maintainer, they are not necessarily public nor very precise, but obviously may be. The co-maintainer receive all the bug reports for the package he is co-maintainer. Technically I see a first possibility to mark somebody as co-maintainer, which would be to add his mail after the maintainer mail, separated by a ',' in the 4th field of the owners.list file. There could of course be any number of co-maintainer. If this is not technically possible, the co-maintainer should be in the initialcclist, and there would be a wiki page listing, for each package the co-maintainers (maybe with their roles). 2. Bug responsivness ==================== I think there should be different rules for different bugs. Here they are: - Very serious bug: a security issue, buildsys screwing (remember dap-server...). In that case the maintainer, a co-maintainer if it is in his role, or any trusted contributor may act upon the issue. Other contributors are urged to help draw attention to that issue by sending a mail to the fedora-extras-list with an apropriate subject. - Serious bugs: a bug that cause the application to fail building, crash when run and there is no workaround, prevent the package from being installed. In that case if the maintainer or a co-maintainer if it is in his role haven't responded within 7 days, then the maintainer sponsor should take over responsibility for this bug, in person or by delegating to anybody else. If the maintainer sponsor cannot or don't want to do that, any trusted contributor may take over responsability for that bug. - Any other bug: nothing here, maintainer or co-maintainer if it is his role should act, but there is no time limit, no possibility of appropriation by others. 3. Other package issues and disputes ==================================== The above rules are not enough when there is no Serious or Very Serious Bug, but some requests for enhancements or requests for updating and so on, or when the maintainer never responds to Serious or Very Serious Bugs. This is more complicated because we want to avoid 2 pitfalls - have packagers feel rejected - have other packagers or users feel the extras packages are badly maintained I see 2 major cases 1) The maintainer seems to be unresponsive. He never fixes himself the Serious and Very Serious bugs, never respond to other requests, never apply fixes that other do, never respond to requests to be co-maintainer or have a mail adress that seems invalid. My proposal is that in that case the sponsor, after enough evidence may nominate some people (including himself) to be co-maintainer(s) with the right to do everything. Apart from the fact that it is not the maintainer who nominated him it is a normal co-maintainer. So he should be warned than if the maintainer awake, he may be revoked. 2) There are disputes over significant design issues (update or not, fix a given known issue that has different debatable way of being fixed), then the issue should be thrown on the fedora-extras-list for a public debate, and the sponsor should arbitrate the dispute. This possibility should only be used when everything else has been tried and for important issues, it denotes a serious issue in communication and/or agreement in fedora extras goal. The sponsor may force the maintainer to chose a given alternative only if there is a wide agreement upon the fedora extras contributors, i.e. the maintainer is the only one defending his case. Otherwise the maintainer has the choice. We should really try hard to avoid forcing the maintainer as he will certainly feel rejected. 4. Stalled reviews ================== The rule above are not very suitable for stalled reviews, still that's also a serious issue that may slow down fedora extras. I see 2 cases 1) the review is stalled because a fix for something is needed but nobody has come with a fix. No problem here. 2) The fix is known, nothing blocks the review except that the submitter doesn't implement what was suggested to him, or block the process otherwise (don't apply for a fedora account although he was sponsored, don't do the cvs import and so on). If somebody wants to take over the submission he should say so in the bug report, and if the originial submitter hasn't responded in 2 weeks, or the submitter has responded within 2 weeks that he was still active but hasn't fixed the issue in 1 month, the new submitter should be allowed to take over the submission, but taking as base the output of the current submission. The new submitter should allready be a fedora extras reviewer, it shouldn't be allowed to be sponsored in a package review when the package review has been taken over. I don't know how this should be done technically, close that bug and reopen a new one, or keep on, changing the submitter or anything else, I am not a bugzilla expert. Remarks: In my proposal the packages are never orphaned against their maintainer will. Last I think that it should be possible to revoke sponsors if they are not playing their role, for example accept undue requests for co-maintainership of unresponsive maintainers. -- Pat From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Sat Apr 15 11:59:07 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 07:59:07 -0400 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 11:43 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi all, > > If you point your browser at: > http://fedoraproject.org/extras/5/i386/repodata/repoview/games.group.html > > Then you see that many packages are listed twice (previous and current > release) I concider this a bug, where should I report this? Why do you consider it a bug that it lists EVERY package in the repository? -sv From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 15 11:57:07 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 13:57:07 +0200 Subject: Contribution to Extras (Re: sounds) In-Reply-To: <20060415083357.49101.qmail@web32602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060415083357.49101.qmail@web32602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4440DF93.80209@hhs.nl> Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > Hi all, > > I have attempted to contact the site's administrators at this address: > > amazingsounds at iespana.es > > from which I obtained the sounds, but their email is invalid. However, on their site at: > > http://amazingsounds.iespana.es/en/ > > it states that: > > The place where you will find all kinds of WAV files...WAV Sounds for you to download, FREE!! ... > > Our content is made basically for multimedia developers or creators that want to use these files ... > > > Do I still need to get in touch with them somehow or does this notice imply free redistribution of their sounds? I guess when it comes to such things, it becomes a little vague. > Hmm, They don't provide any information on the source of their sounds. So either you need to get in touch with them, or you could try using different sounds all together, there are already a few games like yours in Fedora, which come with sounds under a free license, you could try using those. Regards, Hans From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 15 11:59:59 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 13:59:59 +0200 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 seth vidal wrote: > On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 11:43 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Hi all, >> >> If you point your browser at: >> http://fedoraproject.org/extras/5/i386/repodata/repoview/games.group.html >> >> Then you see that many packages are listed twice (previous and current >> release) I concider this a bug, where should I report this? > > Why do you consider it a bug that it lists EVERY package in the > repository? > Because that is not what I want the end user to see when he clicks on the view packages in extras links, wasn't the entire idea behind comps file to only show the user packages which he is interested in and leave out packages which exist for a good reason but are probably of little interest (on their own) to the end user? Also this is not consistent with how yum groupinfo or pirut handle this, they only show the latest version, which is what one would expect. Regards, Hans -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEQOA/47KA3t5s3+8RAkf/AKClCbNeEtexd3q5yvQFHwCXRtfE+ACgzm9l +ZldJlvp5LA3eQhTdVvDINk= =inRy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Sat Apr 15 12:14:38 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 08:14:38 -0400 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1145103278.18481.3.camel@cutter> > Because that is not what I want the end user to see when he clicks on > the view packages in extras links, wasn't the entire idea behind comps > file to only show the user packages which he is interested in and leave > out packages which exist for a good reason but are probably of little > interest (on their own) to the end user? > When I go to the repoview page I want to see ALL packages - I use it as reference point. It is the canonical look up. > Also this is not consistent with how yum groupinfo or pirut handle this, > they only show the latest version, which is what one would expect. yes b/c yum and pirut are not showing you what is there - they're showing you what they would install. Which in both cases is the newest version. -sv From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 12:50:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 08:50:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604151250.k3FCoOO3008782@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 ------- Additional Comments From bdpepple at ameritech.net 2006-04-15 08:50 EST ------- Note that this isn't a formal review. Here's a couple of quick points: 1. Drop the packager, we don't use this in FE. 2. Don't hardcode the dist tag, use %{?dist}. 3. Spec file name shouldn't include the version. 4. Use full URL for the source. 5. Use rpmlint on your binaries, and correct any errors. Before you can be sponsored, you've got to demonstate an understanding of the packaging policies of Fedora Extras. I would suggest reading the wiki fully, since most of the errors are addressed there. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From cw-spam at arcor.de Sat Apr 15 13:03:10 2006 From: cw-spam at arcor.de (Christoph Wickert) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 15:03:10 +0200 Subject: Another Packaging/Review Guidlines clarification Message-ID: <1145106191.4832.6.camel@hal9000.local.lan> How about adding something like: > Must - A package should always use the latest stable upstream release. > If for any reason this isn't possible, this has to be explained in the > review / review request. to the Packaging/Review Guidelines? Not sure if this should be a MUST or a SHOULD. Chris From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 15 13:06:55 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 15:06:55 +0200 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: <1145103278.18481.3.camel@cutter> References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> <1145103278.18481.3.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <4440EFEF.7020705@hhs.nl> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 seth vidal wrote: >> Because that is not what I want the end user to see when he clicks on >> the view packages in extras links, wasn't the entire idea behind comps >> file to only show the user packages which he is interested in and leave >> out packages which exist for a good reason but are probably of little >> interest (on their own) to the end user? >> > > When I go to the repoview page I want to see ALL packages - I use it as > reference point. It is the canonical look up. > No, ls in a repo dir is the canonical lookup, repoview through comps always shows a subset, I see no reason for doubles only distuinguished by version in this subset. Some time ago Chris Chabot said that it would be nice to have a web interface where end users could seen what is available in nice catogories without getting overwhelmed by a zillion sub packages, the answer given then was repoview. Also repoview is direct linked under: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/ Under the Heading "Fedora Extras Users" it is actually most of the content under this heading, I concider showing that the old version is still available to the end user only confusing *. Remember the leaving the old version in the repo is only meant as a fallback mechanism, not as the default mode of operation. * especially since he won't be able to install it without serious manual intervention. So please atleast at an option to repoview to only show the latest version and use that to generate the pages under http://fedoraproject.org/extras/5/i386/repodata/ (and friends) Regards, Hans -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEQO/v47KA3t5s3+8RAhjbAKCGwwNicFyjQRMu6GV2DvTQStr04ACfQ4ER VKgK0k/ywKyYXPLsxSbeGpA= =L0NS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 15 13:42:00 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 15:42:00 +0200 Subject: idea: make cvs-import.sh add entry to owner.list? Message-ID: <4440F828.4060902@hhs.nl> Hi, I just had the following idea, wouldn't it be sweet if cvs-import.sh automaticly added an entry to owners.list (if not already there) ? Regards, Hans From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Sat Apr 15 14:14:35 2006 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 09:14:35 -0500 Subject: idea: make cvs-import.sh add entry to owner.list? In-Reply-To: <4440F828.4060902@hhs.nl> References: <4440F828.4060902@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1145110475.11884.1.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 15:42 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > I just had the following idea, wouldn't it be sweet if cvs-import.sh > automaticly added an entry to owners.list (if not already there) ? I asked about this a while ago. It turned out to be not as trivial as it seems. Where do you get the email address from? You'd also have to take into account that some people use a different email address for bugzilla, etc. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I was discouraged enough to not do anything. But patches are always welcome! josh From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 14:10:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 10:10:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188458] Review Request: libassetml - xml resource database library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604151410.k3FEAsi7021064@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libassetml - xml resource database library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188458 j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-15 10:10 EST ------- Imported and build. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From icon at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 15 14:28:19 2006 From: icon at fedoraproject.org (Konstantin Ryabitsev) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 10:28:19 -0400 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: <4440EFEF.7020705@hhs.nl> References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> <1145103278.18481.3.camel@cutter> <4440EFEF.7020705@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <44410303.5080707@fedoraproject.org> Hans de Goede wrote: > So please atleast at an option to repoview to only show the latest > version and use that to generate the pages under > http://fedoraproject.org/extras/5/i386/repodata/ > (and friends) No. Then things get really complicated for packages that can be installed in parallel, like kernels and kernel modules, and whatnot libraries that can have several legitimate versions, etc. Repoview shows you the contents of a repository. It's a web interface to the contents of primary.xml.gz. Everything else is best accomplished with a tool like yumex or pirut. --icon From chris.stone at gmail.com Sat Apr 15 14:33:48 2006 From: chris.stone at gmail.com (Christopher Stone) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 07:33:48 -0700 Subject: Another Packaging/Review Guidlines clarification In-Reply-To: <1145106191.4832.6.camel@hal9000.local.lan> References: <1145106191.4832.6.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: I don't see anything wrong with it being a MUST. The description says that it SHOULD, and if it doesn't then provide an explanation as to why. Seems fair and simple enough. On 4/15/06, Christoph Wickert wrote: > How about adding something like: > > > Must - A package should always use the latest stable upstream release. > > If for any reason this isn't possible, this has to be explained in the > > review / review request. > > to the Packaging/Review Guidelines? Not sure if this should be a MUST or > a SHOULD. > > Chris > > > > > -- > fedora-extras-list mailing list > fedora-extras-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list > From alexl at users.sourceforge.net Sat Apr 15 14:35:40 2006 From: alexl at users.sourceforge.net (Alex Lancaster) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 07:35:40 -0700 Subject: someone please update epiphany-extensions to 2.14 Message-ID: epiphany-extensions has been stuck at 1.9.7 since the release of FC-5. FC-5 ships with epiphany-2.14.0.1, and the epiphany-extensions version needs to match the epiphany version, which is released. I filed a bug about 3 weeks ago, and there has not been one reply from the maintainer: http://bugzilla.redhat.com/186698 Can somebody else update this package, given that the maintainer seems to be unresponsive? I'm not sure how long you need to wait before the package should be considered orphaned. About 5 other people are also monitoring this bug and 3 weeks seems like an awfully long time to wait for such a simple version upgrade. Thanks, Alex From chris.stone at gmail.com Sat Apr 15 14:38:35 2006 From: chris.stone at gmail.com (Christopher Stone) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 07:38:35 -0700 Subject: idea: make cvs-import.sh add entry to owner.list? In-Reply-To: <1145110475.11884.1.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <4440F828.4060902@hhs.nl> <1145110475.11884.1.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: On 4/15/06, Josh Boyer wrote: > You'd also have to > take into account that some people use a different email address for > bugzilla, etc. hmm should I be using my bugzilla email address in the owners.list file? I'm one of those who use a different e-mail address for bugzilla. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 15 14:42:08 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 16:42:08 +0200 Subject: Another Packaging/Review Guidlines clarification In-Reply-To: <1145106191.4832.6.camel@hal9000.local.lan> References: <1145106191.4832.6.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: <20060415164208.96b51cee.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 15:03:10 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > How about adding something like: > > > Must - A package should always use the latest stable upstream release. > > If for any reason this isn't possible, this has to be explained in the > > review / review request. > > to the Packaging/Review Guidelines? Not sure if this should be a MUST or > a SHOULD. -1 for MUST +1 for an explanation when the latest stable upstream differs I believe we should focus on _stuff that works_, regardless of whether that is during the review process or for updates done to existing packages in FE. What upstream declares "stable" may not be mature enough for Fedora Extras. Often the newest stable release announced by upstream is sort of a beta release because many users didn't try it when it was still in CVS/SVN or an official alpha/beta/rc version. Then, fixes to the stable release are published in quick succession. Brown paperbag bugs are discovered often, too. Packagers should be encouraged not to engage in a release-race with upstream, but to monitor upstream's releases and find a good time for a good release which to use in FE. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 15 15:16:41 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 17:16:41 +0200 Subject: idea: make cvs-import.sh add entry to owner.list? In-Reply-To: References: <4440F828.4060902@hhs.nl> <1145110475.11884.1.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <20060415171641.adff1d2b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 07:38:35 -0700, Christopher Stone wrote: > hmm should I be using my bugzilla email address in the owners.list > file? Yes. > I'm one of those who use a different e-mail address for > bugzilla. > The Bugzilla components are created from owners.list. The email addresses MUST be connected to valid bugzilla accounts. From chris.stone at gmail.com Sat Apr 15 16:10:51 2006 From: chris.stone at gmail.com (Christopher Stone) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 09:10:51 -0700 Subject: idea: make cvs-import.sh add entry to owner.list? In-Reply-To: <20060415171641.adff1d2b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <4440F828.4060902@hhs.nl> <1145110475.11884.1.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20060415171641.adff1d2b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: On 4/15/06, Michael Schwendt wrote: > The Bugzilla components are created from owners.list. The email > addresses MUST be connected to valid bugzilla accounts. Okay, should be fixed now. FWIW http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors makes no mention of this. From cw-spam at arcor.de Sat Apr 15 16:20:54 2006 From: cw-spam at arcor.de (Christoph Wickert) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 18:20:54 +0200 Subject: idea: make cvs-import.sh add entry to owner.list? In-Reply-To: References: <4440F828.4060902@hhs.nl> <1145110475.11884.1.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20060415171641.adff1d2b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1145118054.4832.23.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Am Samstag, den 15.04.2006, 09:10 -0700 schrieb Christopher Stone: > On 4/15/06, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > The Bugzilla components are created from owners.list. The email > > addresses MUST be connected to valid bugzilla accounts. > > Okay, should be fixed now. FWIW > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors makes no mention of > this. > Please read closely. Quote from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors#head-5965349896227b55619c6d73a314d24a8251e423 > Make sure you have an account in [WWW]Bugzilla. > > The email address that you use for your bugzilla account should be the > same email address as you use for all things related to Fedora > Extras. > Christoph From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 15 16:27:42 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 18:27:42 +0200 Subject: idea: make cvs-import.sh add entry to owner.list? In-Reply-To: <1145110475.11884.1.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <4440F828.4060902@hhs.nl> <1145110475.11884.1.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <44411EFE.1080901@hhs.nl> Josh Boyer wrote: > On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 15:42 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I just had the following idea, wouldn't it be sweet if cvs-import.sh >> automaticly added an entry to owners.list (if not already there) ? > > I asked about this a while ago. It turned out to be not as trivial as > it seems. Where do you get the email address from? You'd also have to > take into account that some people use a different email address for > bugzilla, etc. > Can't you get that from ~/.plague-client.cfg, or alternate a special cvs-import.cfg file? > I'm not saying it's impossible, but I was discouraged enough to not do > anything. But patches are always welcome! > Erm, the idea behind posting the idea and not a patch was that someone else would hopefully do the work (someone better at shell scripts). Regards, Hans From chris.stone at gmail.com Sat Apr 15 16:30:41 2006 From: chris.stone at gmail.com (Christopher Stone) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 09:30:41 -0700 Subject: idea: make cvs-import.sh add entry to owner.list? In-Reply-To: <1145118054.4832.23.camel@hal9000.local.lan> References: <4440F828.4060902@hhs.nl> <1145110475.11884.1.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20060415171641.adff1d2b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145118054.4832.23.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: On 4/15/06, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Samstag, den 15.04.2006, 09:10 -0700 schrieb Christopher Stone: > > On 4/15/06, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > The Bugzilla components are created from owners.list. The email > > > addresses MUST be connected to valid bugzilla accounts. > > > > Okay, should be fixed now. FWIW > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors makes no mention of > > this. > > > > Please read closely. Quote from > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors#head-5965349896227b55619c6d73a314d24a8251e423 > > > Make sure you have an account in [WWW]Bugzilla. > > > > The email address that you use for your bugzilla account should be the > > same email address as you use for all things related to Fedora > > Extras. > > Well, maybe it _should_, but it's not a must. That doesn't mean that the section on editing the owners.list file is not lacking in some detail on that wiki page. I think it would also be a nice addition to mention the format of the owners.list file. Perhaps if some discussion on the format was mentioned I would have not made the mistake initially. Anyway, I'm using my "get out of jail free card" that was handed out to first time packagers. I corrected my mistake and it should be fixed now. I'm hoping the mistake was benign. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 15 16:36:06 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 18:36:06 +0200 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: <44410303.5080707@fedoraproject.org> References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> <1145103278.18481.3.camel@cutter> <4440EFEF.7020705@hhs.nl> <44410303.5080707@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <444120F6.1000602@hhs.nl> Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > Hans de Goede wrote: >> So please atleast at an option to repoview to only show the latest >> version and use that to generate the pages under >> http://fedoraproject.org/extras/5/i386/repodata/ >> (and friends) > > No. Then things get really complicated for packages that can be > installed in parallel, like kernels and kernel modules, and whatnot > libraries that can have several legitimate versions, etc. > What does this have todo with anything, doesn't the kernel version for which a module is get put into the name part of the module? (last time I used external modules in rpm format is some time ago). Let me rephrase: there is no reason for mentioning the version in repoview, so let me then advocate to not show the version which will have as a result that the double entries are just that 100% double -> so they are a bug. > Repoview shows you the contents of a repository. It's a web interface to > the contents of primary.xml.gz. Everything else is best accomplished > with a tool like yumex or pirut. > And what does a webinterface to show the contents of a repo and the parallel installing of kernels have todo with eachother??? Please stop thinking about this from your own pov and start thinking about our end users. The multiple versions listed in repoview will confuse regular end users! Since repoview is very prominently linked to as being _the_ way for users to see which packages there are this is BAD I'm sure you've got good technical reasons for listing all versions but this is _not_ good for end users! Regards, Hans From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 15 16:47:41 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 18:47:41 +0200 Subject: idea: make cvs-import.sh add entry to owner.list? In-Reply-To: <1145118054.4832.23.camel@hal9000.local.lan> References: <4440F828.4060902@hhs.nl> <1145110475.11884.1.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20060415171641.adff1d2b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145118054.4832.23.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: <20060415184741.b07ca061.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 18:20:54 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Samstag, den 15.04.2006, 09:10 -0700 schrieb Christopher Stone: > > On 4/15/06, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > The Bugzilla components are created from owners.list. The email > > > addresses MUST be connected to valid bugzilla accounts. > > > > Okay, should be fixed now. FWIW > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors makes no mention of > > this. > > > > Please read closely. Quote from > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors#head-5965349896227b55619c6d73a314d24a8251e423 > > > Make sure you have an account in [WWW]Bugzilla. > > > > The email address that you use for your bugzilla account should be the > > same email address as you use for all things related to Fedora > > Extras. > > Plus, the top of owners.list contains this: # All e-mail addresses used here MUST correspond to existing bugzilla accounts! From cw-spam at arcor.de Sat Apr 15 16:53:06 2006 From: cw-spam at arcor.de (Christoph Wickert) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 18:53:06 +0200 Subject: idea: make cvs-import.sh add entry to owner.list? In-Reply-To: References: <4440F828.4060902@hhs.nl> <1145110475.11884.1.camel@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20060415171641.adff1d2b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145118054.4832.23.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: <1145119986.4832.33.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Am Samstag, den 15.04.2006, 09:30 -0700 schrieb Christopher Stone: > On 4/15/06, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > Am Samstag, den 15.04.2006, 09:10 -0700 schrieb Christopher Stone: > > > On 4/15/06, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > > The Bugzilla components are created from owners.list. The email > > > > addresses MUST be connected to valid bugzilla accounts. > > > > > > Okay, should be fixed now. FWIW > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors makes no mention of > > > this. > > > > > > > Please read closely. Quote from > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors#head-5965349896227b55619c6d73a314d24a8251e423 > > > > > Make sure you have an account in [WWW]Bugzilla. > > > > > > The email address that you use for your bugzilla account should be the > > > same email address as you use for all things related to Fedora > > > Extras. > > > > > Well, maybe it _should_, but it's not a must. > > That doesn't mean that the section on editing the owners.list file is > not lacking in some detail on that wiki page. I think it would also > be a nice addition to mention the format of the owners.list file. The page has just been updated: > The following page has been changed by VilleSkytt?: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors > > The comment on the change is: > Note that email addresses in owners.list must be bugzilla account > ones. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > cvs co owners > }}} > > - 1. Next, edit `owners/owners.list` and add an entry to the list for > your new package. > + 1. Next, edit `owners/owners.list` and add an entry to the list for > your new package. Use your Bugzilla account email address as the > initial owner. > > || Be careful about line wrapping in your text editor! > Ill-placed line endings are ''bad''. || > Anyway, I'm using my "get out of jail free card" that was handed out > to first time packagers. I corrected my mistake and it should be > fixed now. I'm hoping the mistake was benign. No problem, nobody is perfect Christoph From jspaleta at gmail.com Sat Apr 15 17:04:57 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 13:04:57 -0400 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: <444120F6.1000602@hhs.nl> References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> <1145103278.18481.3.camel@cutter> <4440EFEF.7020705@hhs.nl> <44410303.5080707@fedoraproject.org> <444120F6.1000602@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <604aa7910604151004j7864b068n92de290d1d5f2f2a@mail.gmail.com> On 4/15/06, Hans de Goede wrote: > Please stop thinking about this from your own pov and start thinking > about our end users. end users have end-user client tools. Why do you consider repoview an enduser specific tool? > The multiple versions listed in repoview will > > confuse regular end users! Why are "regular" users using repoview instead of the client tools? Since repoview is very prominently linked to > as being _the_ way for users to see which packages there are It is? Where? -jef From chris.stone at gmail.com Sat Apr 15 17:19:42 2006 From: chris.stone at gmail.com (Christopher Stone) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 10:19:42 -0700 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: <604aa7910604151004j7864b068n92de290d1d5f2f2a@mail.gmail.com> References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> <1145103278.18481.3.camel@cutter> <4440EFEF.7020705@hhs.nl> <44410303.5080707@fedoraproject.org> <444120F6.1000602@hhs.nl> <604aa7910604151004j7864b068n92de290d1d5f2f2a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 4/15/06, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 4/15/06, Hans de Goede wrote: > > Please stop thinking about this from your own pov and start thinking > > about our end users. > > end users have end-user client tools. Why do you consider repoview > an enduser specific tool? > > > The multiple versions listed in repoview will > > > confuse regular end users! > Why are "regular" users using repoview instead of the client tools? I guess because it's directly linked from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/ as the list of available packages as Hans mentioned previously in this thread. From jspaleta at gmail.com Sat Apr 15 17:24:00 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 13:24:00 -0400 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> <1145103278.18481.3.camel@cutter> <4440EFEF.7020705@hhs.nl> <44410303.5080707@fedoraproject.org> <444120F6.1000602@hhs.nl> <604aa7910604151004j7864b068n92de290d1d5f2f2a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910604151024k744f4e60hadcd9af7a9628012@mail.gmail.com> On 4/15/06, Christopher Stone wrote: > I guess because it's directly linked from > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/ as the list of available > packages as Hans mentioned previously in this thread. Hmm, seems that earlier post gotten eaten for me oh well. Perhaps this isnt a bug with repoview.. and its a wiki bug. If pointing "end users" to repoview is causing undue frustration, which I doubt is happening, then reword the wiki. -jef From chris.stone at gmail.com Sat Apr 15 17:56:20 2006 From: chris.stone at gmail.com (Christopher Stone) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 10:56:20 -0700 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: <604aa7910604151024k744f4e60hadcd9af7a9628012@mail.gmail.com> References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> <1145103278.18481.3.camel@cutter> <4440EFEF.7020705@hhs.nl> <44410303.5080707@fedoraproject.org> <444120F6.1000602@hhs.nl> <604aa7910604151004j7864b068n92de290d1d5f2f2a@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910604151024k744f4e60hadcd9af7a9628012@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 4/15/06, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 4/15/06, Christopher Stone wrote: > > I guess because it's directly linked from > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/ as the list of available > > packages as Hans mentioned previously in this thread. > > Hmm, seems that earlier post gotten eaten for me oh well. > > Perhaps this isnt a bug with repoview.. and its a wiki bug. If > pointing "end users" to repoview is causing undue frustration, which I > doubt is happening, then reword the wiki. Perhaps. But then again, the left frame of http://fedoraproject.org/extras/5/x86_64/repodata/repoview/abe-0-1.1-2.fc5.html looks pretty silly mentioning abe twice with no version number. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 15 17:56:47 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 19:56:47 +0200 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: <604aa7910604151024k744f4e60hadcd9af7a9628012@mail.gmail.com> References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> <1145103278.18481.3.camel@cutter> <4440EFEF.7020705@hhs.nl> <44410303.5080707@fedoraproject.org> <444120F6.1000602@hhs.nl> <604aa7910604151004j7864b068n92de290d1d5f2f2a@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910604151024k744f4e60hadcd9af7a9628012@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <444133DF.1010807@hhs.nl> Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 4/15/06, Christopher Stone wrote: >> I guess because it's directly linked from >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/ as the list of available >> packages as Hans mentioned previously in this thread. > > Hmm, seems that earlier post gotten eaten for me oh well. > > Perhaps this isnt a bug with repoview.. and its a wiki bug. If > pointing "end users" to repoview is causing undue frustration, which I > doubt is happening, then reword the wiki. > How? I think its a good thing that the wiki points to a list of available packages categorized in a sane way, I also think its a good thing this list is automaticly generated, so pointing end users to repoview is good. All I'm asking for is an option in the repoview generation to filter out the doubles and then we need to setup some scripts to generate a special version where the wiki can point at. That or just fix repoview my first idea when I saw the doubles was: "thats a bug" and sofar I haven't seen any evidence that its not. It is not what one would expect, it violates the principle of least surprise so its a bug, or a mis feature. But as we all know if you cannot turn it of its not a feature, its a bug. I cannot believe I'm the only one who thinks these double entries are user-unfriendly. As said before I don't want to discuss the technical reasons behind this. From an end user pov its just plain wrong. Nobody has argued otherwise, and if its wrong from an end user pov its a bug end of discussion. Regards, Hans From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 18:08:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 14:08:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604151808.k3FI8HMk028337@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl 2006-04-15 14:08 EST ------- Sorry, no time for a formal review right now, but I wonder what is the .soname of the library this package installs, how does this mix with the ctapi driver for towitoko card readers? How can an application determine which one it will get, should the application determine this or should there be a layer in between with its own configuration. I know lots of questions for someone who is just packaging the driver (lib) but I wonder how this will interact with other cardreader drivers, and I would rather get this right in one go if possible. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 18:09:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 14:09:47 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604151809.k3FI9lIE028789@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 ------- Additional Comments From frank-buettner at gmx.net 2006-04-15 14:09 EST ------- Thanks I have fixed this 5 erros and use rpmlint. The URL of the new files is: Spec file URL: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/ctapi-cyberjack.spec?download SRPM file URL: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/ctapi-cyberjack-2.0.8-2.src.rpm?download But one error of rpmlint is not true. rpmlint print: E: ctapi-cyberjack library-not-linked-against-libc /usr/lib/readers/libctapi-cyberjack.so.2.0.8 but the lib is linked against libc ldd /usr/lib/readers/libctapi-cyberjack.so.2.0.8 linux-gate.so.1 => (0x008c8000) /lib/libNoVersion.so.1 (0x003f9000) libusb-0.1.so.4 => /usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4 (0x00769000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x00d45000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x008c9000) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 15 18:21:12 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 20:21:12 +0200 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> <1145103278.18481.3.camel@cutter> <4440EFEF.7020705@hhs.nl> <44410303.5080707@fedoraproject.org> <444120F6.1000602@hhs.nl> <604aa7910604151004j7864b068n92de290d1d5f2f2a@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910604151024k744f4e60hadcd9af7a9628012@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060415202112.99ada96a.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 10:56:20 -0700, Christopher Stone wrote: > Perhaps. But then again, the left frame of > http://fedoraproject.org/extras/5/x86_64/repodata/repoview/abe-0-1.1-2.fc5.html > looks pretty silly mentioning abe twice with no version number. So true. repoview is a great web-based interface for browsing repositories and package descriptions. Multiple versions of a package confuse users, however, and increase the browsable information with no good reason. From jspaleta at gmail.com Sat Apr 15 18:22:48 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 14:22:48 -0400 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: <444133DF.1010807@hhs.nl> References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> <1145103278.18481.3.camel@cutter> <4440EFEF.7020705@hhs.nl> <44410303.5080707@fedoraproject.org> <444120F6.1000602@hhs.nl> <604aa7910604151004j7864b068n92de290d1d5f2f2a@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910604151024k744f4e60hadcd9af7a9628012@mail.gmail.com> <444133DF.1010807@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <604aa7910604151122h7b0649aah40be33b8180d2b0c@mail.gmail.com> On 4/15/06, Hans de Goede wrote: > I cannot believe I'm the only one who thinks these double entries are > user-unfriendly. As said before I don't want to discuss the technical > reasons behind this. From an end user pov its just plain wrong. Nobody > has argued otherwise, and if its wrong from an end user pov its a bug > end of discussion. I personally find value in having repoview list everything thats in the repo. I find value in that tool feature when helping people troubleshoot problems where they need to revert a recent update which caused a problem for them. I can not speak for other end-users, but I'm not aware of any other discussion where "regular" users have been confused to the extent you are suggesting. And I think its pretty clear that neither of us can really claim to be "regular" users so our personal opinions are inherently skewed away from "regular" perceptions. -jef From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 15 18:24:12 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 14:24:12 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060415182412.1B3258001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 1 mod_security-1.9.3-2.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 15 18:25:04 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 14:25:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060415182504.D13908001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 2 gnochm-0.9.7-5.fc4 php-adodb-4.80-1.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 18:19:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 14:19:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604151819.k3FIJ9wi030912@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 ------- Additional Comments From frank-buettner at gmx.net 2006-04-15 14:19 EST ------- (In reply to comment #7) > Sorry, no time for a formal review right now, but I wonder what is the .soname > of the library this package installs, how does this mix with the ctapi driver > for towitoko card readers? How can an application determine which one it will > get, should the application determine this or should there be a layer in between This is an general problem with the ctapi driver's on linux. That all drivers have an lib called ctap.so. So I think that is needed, that all persons witch make packages witch contains ctapi driver must talk to provide an solution for this. My idear is that the lib's will go to /usr/lib/readers and the files are called ctapi-name.so.version where name will be the name of the reader for witch the lib is. For the application this will be no problem since it load the lib via dlopen(). And need an file as arument. So when here on the list other persons witch build ctapi driver then we must talk about it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 15 18:25:57 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 14:25:57 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060415182557.77AC38001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 4 crystal-stacker-1.5-0.pre.2.fc5 crystal-stacker-themes-1.0-1.fc5 gnochm-0.9.7-5.fc5 php-adodb-4.80-1.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 15 18:28:05 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 14:28:05 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060415182805.D129C8001@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 8 gnochm-0.9.7-5.fc6 libassetml-1.2.1-1.fc6 milter-greylist-2.1.4-1.fc6 net6-1.3.0-1.rc1.fc6 php-adodb-4.80-1.fc6 seamonkey-1.0.1-1.fc6 wv-1.2.0-4.fc6 xemacs-21.5.26-3.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 15 18:39:51 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 20:39:51 +0200 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-14 In-Reply-To: <20060414195635.6022.14067@faldor.intranet> References: <20060414195635.6022.14067@faldor.intranet> Message-ID: <20060415203951.a2e86667.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 19:56:35 -0000, Michael Schwendt wrote: > New report for: dcbw AT redhat.com > > package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 > unresolved deps: > createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 > > package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 > unresolved deps: > createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 > > package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc > unresolved deps: > createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 I've taken the time to verify that this is no false positive. It exists for over a month. http://bugzilla.redhat.com/170531 seems to have been reopened for this. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 18:32:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 14:32:51 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604151832.k3FIWpJS001946@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-15 14:32 EST ------- I thought I'd take a look what triggers the allegedly wrong rpmlint error, but could not because the build fails on x86_64: ld -x --shared -lusb -o libctapi-cyberjack.so ctn_list.o cjctapi_beep.o cjctapi_switch.o ecom/libctapi-ecom.a ppa/libctapi-ppa.a ld: ctn_list.o: relocation R_X86_64_32 against `a local symbol' can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC ctn_list.o: could not read symbols: Bad value make[1]: *** [libso] Error 1 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 18:38:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 14:38:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188478] Review Request: fxload-2002_04_11.spec In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604151838.k3FIcn51003883@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fxload-2002_04_11.spec https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188478 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-04-15 14:38 EST ------- There isn't one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 19:09:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 15:09:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604151909.k3FJ9xQY010531@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 ------- Additional Comments From frank-buettner at gmx.net 2006-04-15 15:09 EST ------- I don't have an EMT64(alias x86_64) CPU so I can't test it on it. But in the Makefile the -fPIC set in the CFLAGS. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 19:23:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 15:23:19 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604151923.k3FJNJOC012571@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 ------- Additional Comments From frank-buettner at gmx.net 2006-04-15 15:23 EST ------- Ok I have found the problem. I will write an patch for the makefile. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 15 19:43:50 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 19:43:50 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-15 Message-ID: <20060415194350.6005.37044@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 15 19:43:57 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 19:43:57 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-15 Message-ID: <20060415194357.6008.17424@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 15 19:44:05 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 19:44:05 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-15 Message-ID: <20060415194405.6012.34416@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 15 19:44:13 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 19:44:13 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-15 Message-ID: <20060415194413.6016.3410@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 Macaulay2-doc 0.9.2-22.fc6.i386 Macaulay2-emacs 0.9.2-17.fc4.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gobby 0.3.0-4.fc5.i386 gparted 0.2.4-1.fc6.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 obby 0.3.0-3.fc5.i386 qtparted 0.4.5-4.fc5.i386 smart 0.41-30.fc6.i386 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc Macaulay2-doc 0.9.2-22.fc6.ppc Macaulay2-emacs 0.9.2-17.fc4.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gobby 0.3.0-4.fc5.ppc gparted 0.2.4-1.fc6.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc obby 0.3.0-3.fc5.ppc qtparted 0.4.5-4.fc5.ppc smart 0.41-30.fc6.ppc sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gobby 0.3.0-4.fc5.x86_64 gparted 0.2.4-1.fc6.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 obby 0.3.0-3.fc5.x86_64 qtparted 0.4.5-4.fc5.x86_64 smart 0.41-30.fc6.x86_64 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== New report for: lmacken AT redhat.com package: gobby - 0.3.0-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0 package: obby - 0.3.0-3.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0 package: obby - 0.3.0-3.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0()(64bit) package: gobby - 0.3.0-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0()(64bit) package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0()(64bit) package: gobby - 0.3.0-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0 package: obby - 0.3.0-3.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0 ====================================================================== package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: Macaulay2-doc - 0.9.2-22.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: Macaulay2-emacs - 0.9.2-17.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: gparted - 0.2.4-1.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libparted-1.6.so.14 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: qtparted - 0.4.5-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libparted-1.6.so.14 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: gparted - 0.2.4-1.fc6.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libparted-1.6.so.14()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: qtparted - 0.4.5-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libparted-1.6.so.14()(64bit) package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0()(64bit) libglade gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: qtparted - 0.4.5-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libparted-1.6.so.14 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: Macaulay2-doc - 0.9.2-22.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: gparted - 0.2.4-1.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libparted-1.6.so.14 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: Macaulay2-emacs - 0.9.2-17.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 19:53:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 15:53:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187625] Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604151953.k3FJrWoa018501@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187625 ------- Additional Comments From rjune at bravegnuworld.com 2006-04-15 15:53 EST ------- Moved HTML files to %doc ices-2.0.1-5.src.rpm: http://home.bravegnuworld.com/~rjune/rpm/SRPMS/ices-2.0.1-5.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From icon at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 15 20:11:30 2006 From: icon at fedoraproject.org (Konstantin Ryabitsev) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 16:11:30 -0400 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: <444120F6.1000602@hhs.nl> References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> <1145103278.18481.3.camel@cutter> <4440EFEF.7020705@hhs.nl> <44410303.5080707@fedoraproject.org> <444120F6.1000602@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <44415372.8030202@fedoraproject.org> Hans de Goede wrote: >> No. Then things get really complicated for packages that can be >> installed in parallel, like kernels and kernel modules, and whatnot >> libraries that can have several legitimate versions, etc. >> > What does this have todo with anything, doesn't the kernel version for > which a module is get put into the name part of the module? (last time I > used external modules in rpm format is some time ago). Let me rephrase: > there is no reason for mentioning the version in repoview, so let me > then advocate to not show the version which will have as a result that > the double entries are just that 100% double -> so they are a bug. Why do you say there is no reason to show the version in repoview? If you come across a repository that provides gimp, wouldn't you be at the very least interested in which version it is that they are providing before installing it? Moreover, here's the output of 'yum list kmod-madwifi*' on my machine: Available Packages kmod-madwifi.i586 0.0.0.20060317-3.2.6.1 livna kmod-madwifi-kdump.i686 0.0.0.20060317-3.2.6.1 livna kmod-madwifi-smp.i686 0.0.0.20060317-3.2.6.1 livna kmod-madwifi-xen0.i686 0.0.0.20060317-3.2.6.1 livna If you're looking for kernel modules, wouldn't you be interested in knowing for what kernels the packages are built? And if you're looking for specific version, listing just the latest one will NOT be helpful. See, there are all these cases that make "just list the newest version" not a very sane default, and it's certainly thus far not a feature that I would spend much time implementing just to satisfy a couple of vocal complainers. > Please stop thinking about this from your own pov and start thinking > about our end users. The multiple versions listed in repoview will > confuse regular end users! Since repoview is very prominently linked to > as being _the_ way for users to see which packages there are this is BAD > I'm sure you've got good technical reasons for listing all > versions but this is _not_ good for end users! Yes, and in return, I will ask you to stop waving around some ephemeral (and inept) "regular end-users." People who are going to be confused by multiple available versions of a package are NOT going to be accessing repoview listings in the first place -- repoview is a utility for people who have a level of familiarity with the system, and they will certainly be quite comfortable with the fact that the repository may provide multiple versions of a package -- especially seeing as there are legitimate reasons to do so. This point is moot -- I will not be implementing version comparisons in repoview. The software lists ALL packages provided by a repository, not an arbitrary subset. --icon From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 20:29:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 16:29:42 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188180] Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604152029.k3FKTgYM023609@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-15 16:29 EST ------- OK, sounds reasonable. %changelog * Sat Apr 15 2006 Simon Perreault - 4.1.2-5 - Disable C++ exceptions. Spec Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/qt4-4.1.2-5.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.testing/qt4-4.1.2-5.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From wart at kobold.org Sat Apr 15 20:36:06 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Wart) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 13:36:06 -0700 Subject: Your Fedora glows blue for a moment Message-ID: <44415936.3060600@kobold.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 A group of game developers, packagers, and enthusiasts have gathered together as the Games Special Interest Group (SIG) in Fedora Extras. We have conspired to form a new mailing list (http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-games-list) and IRC channel (#fedora-games on irc.freenode.net). The SIG is involved in several activities related to the promotion of Games in Fedora. We actively seek out new games, game-related libraries, and game development tools to package. We review each other package submissions to expedite the approval process. We strive to document the games that we package so that users can get an idea of what the game is like before they install and play it. We discuss new packaging guidelines specific to game packages. Of course, we also tend to play them a lot as well. :) Join us on #fedora-games or on fedora-games-list at redhat.com if you'd like to help out the open-source gaming community. Mailing list: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-games-list Wiki page: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Games Documentation: http://fedoraproject/org/wiki/Games -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEQVk0DeYlPfs40g8RAt6ZAJwJ2sawaku45TdTq0Q9fTrzXlQCwwCffpxY K/qrg0rX7i4cUMg+htAyfWY= =/RJz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 20:40:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 16:40:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604152040.k3FKeIwp026320@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 ------- Additional Comments From frank-buettner at gmx.net 2006-04-15 16:40 EST ------- Ok the problem shut now be fixed. Try the new files Spec file URL: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/ctapi-cyberjack.spec?download SRPM file URL: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/ctapi-cyberjack-2.0.8-3.src.rpm?download The problem was in tze old spec file there was some testcode for the new 2.0.10 version. But this version have bugs so I use 2.0.8 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 21:05:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 17:05:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604152105.k3FL5n8E029987@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-15 17:05 EST ------- I'll look at the rpmlint error later, but at least /usr/lib64/readers/libctapi-cyberjack.so.2.0.8 is missing executable permissions. The pcsc subpackage should have "Provides: pcsc-ifd-handler". pcsc-lite requires at least one such package installed. Additionally, I'd suggest using "pcsc-lite-cyberjack" as the PCSC package name for consistency with openct and the package naming guidelines for plugin-like packages. Also, the preferred install location for pcsc-lite drivers can be retrieved with "pkg-config libpcsclite --variable=usbdropdir", I'd suggest using adding a build dependency on pcsc-lite-devel and using that for the pcsc stuff. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 22:05:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 18:05:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187932] Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604152205.k3FM5xpE006589@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187932 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-15 18:05 EST ------- * ignorable rpmlint warnings: W: paraview-demos no-documentation W: paraview-data no-documentation W: paraview-debuginfo objdump-failed * follows naming guidelines * licence is right * spec is legible * source match the upstream * own created directories * .desktop files are present APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Apr 15 22:08:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 18:08:42 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188369] Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604152208.k3FM8ghp006975@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-cyberjack https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 ------- Additional Comments From frank-buettner at gmx.net 2006-04-15 18:08 EST ------- only read for /usr/lib64/readers/libctapi-cyberjack.so.2.0.8 is ok because the file will only be readed via dlopen() and not exec. The PC/SC part are not testet at this time because I have no apps for real testing. I have only try pcscd -f and this will work. It say: pcscdaemon.c:251 main: pcscd set to foreground readerfactory.c:1391 RFInitializeReader: Attempting startup of REINER SCT cyberJack pinpad/e-com USB 0 0. readerfactory.c:1133 RFBindFunctions: Loading IFD Handler 2.0 Ok I can rename ctapi-cyberjack-PC-SC to ctapi-cyberjack-ifd-handler when this is better. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 16 00:19:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 20:19:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604160019.k3G0JPgw026191@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-15 20:19 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodevelop.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodevelop-0.10-3.src.rpm Updated to now require mono-debugger and boo. Also contains a number of fixes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From smooge at gmail.com Sun Apr 16 00:25:57 2006 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 18:25:57 -0600 Subject: Thankyou for a FC3 clamav Message-ID: <80d7e4090604151725p59953f70u1ad073f11c9bd524@mail.gmail.com> I wanted to say thankyou to whoever built the clamav for FC3. I considered this end of lifed and was working on rolling my own when it popped up today. Thankyou for the bits Stephen -- Stephen J Smoogen. CSIRT/Linux System Administrator From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 16 00:20:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 20:20:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178901] Review Request: gtksourceview-sharp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604160020.k3G0Kv53026436@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gtksourceview-sharp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178901 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-15 20:20 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/gtksourceview-sharp.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/gtksourceview-sharp-2.0-3.src.rpm Additional buildreq -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From katzj at redhat.com Sun Apr 16 03:08:43 2006 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 23:08:43 -0400 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: <44415372.8030202@fedoraproject.org> References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> <1145103278.18481.3.camel@cutter> <4440EFEF.7020705@hhs.nl> <44410303.5080707@fedoraproject.org> <444120F6.1000602@hhs.nl> <44415372.8030202@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1145156923.18210.1.camel@aglarond.local> On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 16:11 -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > See, there are all these cases that make "just list the newest version" > not a very sane default, and it's certainly thus far not a feature that > I would spend much time implementing just to satisfy a couple of vocal > complainers. At the same time, it might make sense to list package and then have all of the available versions on a per-package page as opposed to a page for each version of the package. That might be a way to appease both sides of the discussion Jeremy From holbrookbw at users.sourceforge.net Sun Apr 16 03:20:45 2006 From: holbrookbw at users.sourceforge.net (Brandon Holbrook) Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 22:20:45 -0500 Subject: Comments on Horde / IMP? In-Reply-To: <44415936.3060600@kobold.org> References: <44415936.3060600@kobold.org> Message-ID: <4441B80D.4060400@users.sourceforge.net> All, While in the process of waiting for my first package to be approved, I've been considering some of the other Linux apps that I use regularly that are not already a part of FC / FE, and to my surprise found that horde (www.horde.org: imp, kronolith, ingo, etc...) web-based framework / webmail are not already packaged in FE. As a daily user / admin for Horde, I would be more than happy to package / submit / maintain horde and its associated packages, but want to run it by the community first. I saw the phpBB emails earlier that warned against including phpBB in FE due to its numerous security flaws. AFAIK, Horde has the occasional security advisory, but not an inordinate amount to consider it dangerous or unusable, but others out there may keep up better than I. Does anybody know of a reason why not to package horde and its ilk, or if it has been submitted before and the reason for rejection. CentOS Extras already has a collection of Horde RPMS that look like they need very little tweaking to be FE-compatible. -Brandon From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 16 10:35:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 06:35:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187430] Review Request: elektra In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604161035.k3GAZLWw015108@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: elektra https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187430 ------- Additional Comments From avi at unix.sh 2006-04-16 06:35 EST ------- (In reply to comment #12) > > > > > * DTDVERSION isn't usefull > Why? OK. Hardcoded later. > There is still one left: > mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_lib}/libelektra.a $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib Fixed. > Ok. libelektra.so should be in a development package, however. It is as /usr/lib/libelektra.a I'm not sure I understand this. Are you saying that libelektra.so must be duplicated in the -devel and main package ? > libelektra_berkeleydb_la_LDFLAGS = -avaoid-version -module Thanks for this tip ! > It would even be better to install the backend libraries in a specific > directory (say /lib/elektra-backends/, with the help of a backenddir > automake varialbe) and use lt_dlsetsearchpath. We'll think about it in next versions. > > The correct URL is > > http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/elektra/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz > > We re working with the development version, which is not in SF. Use this > > instead: > > > > http://avi.alkalay.net/software/elektra/ > > No. We want to avoid using private source when public sources exist. > Indeed we cannot review all the sources so we rely on public sources > having been reviewed. The correct URL is being used. I gave you my private one just for your test. Please download the update for your new test again from the private URL. > I am not opposed to having a comment like this one: > > # to rebuild from cvs you need: > # automake autoconf libtool gettext-devel OK, they are just comments now. > In fact it is not ;-). The backend-berkeleydb is dlopened so > no need for ldconfig call. Thats right. Removed. > What about > %configure --libdir=/%{_lib} \ > --bindir=/bin \ > --disable-xmltest \ > --with-docbook=%{_datadir}/sgml/docbook/xsl-stylesheets Thanks ! > > > * the %post action should only be done for the first install? > > > > Yes, it is correct this way. > > I don't really understand your answer, but my question was not a > well formulated question ;-). So here it is: > > Should the following 2 commands be run only for the first > installation? > kdb set -t dir system/sw > kdb set system/sw/kdb/schemapath > "%{_datadir}/sgml/elektra-%{DTDVERSION}/elektra.xsd" They must be executed on every install, upgrade, etc because we want to set the correct DTD version being installed. So there is no need to test if we are in a fresh installation or upgrade with a `if [ $1 -eq 0 ]; then` -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 16 11:22:28 2006 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 16:52:28 +0530 Subject: Your Fedora glows blue for a moment In-Reply-To: <44415936.3060600@kobold.org> References: <44415936.3060600@kobold.org> Message-ID: <1145186548.349.22.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 13:36 -0700, Wart wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > A group of game developers, packagers, and enthusiasts have > gathered together as the Games Special Interest Group (SIG) in > Fedora Extras. We have conspired to form a new mailing list > (http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-games-list) and > IRC channel (#fedora-games on irc.freenode.net). > > The SIG is involved in several activities related to the > promotion of Games in Fedora. We actively seek out new games, > game-related libraries, and game development tools to package. > We review each other package submissions to expedite the approval > process. We strive to document the games that we package so that > users can get an idea of what the game is like before they > install and play it. We discuss new packaging guidelines > specific to game packages. > > Of course, we also tend to play them a lot as well. :) > > Join us on #fedora-games or on fedora-games-list at redhat.com if > you'd like to help out the open-source gaming community. Great initiative. Rock on. Rahul From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 16 11:25:30 2006 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 16:55:30 +0530 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <1145186731.349.25.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 13:10 +1200, Michael J Knox wrote: > Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 15:59 -0700, Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Okay, so between the not so related to programming full-time work, > >> I've made some improvements to my 2D shooter game "Maximum > >> Destruction" AND have been in touch with Mr. Paul Riche III (original > >> SC2 designer) and UR Quan Masters development team. > >> > >> Both of them allowed me to use the SC2 game images in Fedora's > >> "Extras" portion for free and non-commercial purposes only. > > > > Thats incompatible with Fedora packaging guidelines. A written license > > should be included that is Free and/or open source is required. > > > > My understanding was that you only *had* to provide a written license if > the upstream supplied one. I could be wrong tho.... > > My libedit package is an example of this, no upstream license, but its > been approved and is currently packaged with out a license file. > > I would recommend that Victor requests a license to be provided in the > future (I did this for libedit), but the written license is only > required if one is already supplied. I would consider this bad practise. End users and developers should be able to look at the licensing terms easily. I suggest that FESCo discuss this. Rahul From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 16 11:30:41 2006 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 17:00:41 +0530 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <444048CC.4090004@timj.co.uk> References: <20060415005443.50940.qmail@web32606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <444048CC.4090004@timj.co.uk> Message-ID: <1145187042.349.28.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 02:13 +0100, Tim Jackson wrote: > > P.S. OT: The destination anchors generated by the wiki suck. 40 random > hex digits is just ridiculous for uniqueness within a page. > ".../Guidelines#Licensing" would be much more appropriate. Is this possible? > Very much possible but a manual process. Something like [[Anchor (anchorme)]] needs to be added. Rahul From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Apr 16 11:50:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 07:50:40 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188478] Review Request: fxload-2002_04_11.spec In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604161150.k3GBoe07027893@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fxload-2002_04_11.spec https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188478 ------- Additional Comments From ndbecker2 at verizon.net 2006-04-16 07:50 EST ------- In that case, I think I have answered all questions and an updated fxload spec is available. (I fixed Source0 as requested) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From chris.stone at gmail.com Sun Apr 16 15:06:56 2006 From: chris.stone at gmail.com (Christopher Stone) Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 08:06:56 -0700 Subject: Where to report bugs for repoview? In-Reply-To: <1145156923.18210.1.camel@aglarond.local> References: <4440C039.5020304@hhs.nl> <1145102347.18481.0.camel@cutter> <4440E03F.1060905@hhs.nl> <1145103278.18481.3.camel@cutter> <4440EFEF.7020705@hhs.nl> <44410303.5080707@fedoraproject.org> <444120F6.1000602@hhs.nl> <44415372.8030202@fedoraproject.org> <1145156923.18210.1.camel@aglarond.local> Message-ID: On 4/15/06, Jeremy Katz wrote: > At the same time, it might make sense to list package and then have all > of the available versions on a per-package page as opposed to a page for > each version of the package. That might be a way to appease both sides > of the discussion Makes sense to me. Anyway, to answer Hans' original question, the instructions for reporting bugs for repoview are outlined here: http://linux.duke.edu/projects/mini/repoview/ From wart at kobold.org Sun Apr 16 17:28:50 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Wart) Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 10:28:50 -0700 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <1145186731.349.25.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> <1145186731.349.25.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> Message-ID: <44427ED2.9080501@kobold.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 13:10 +1200, Michael J Knox wrote: > >>Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> >>>On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 15:59 -0700, Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: >>> >>>>Hi all, >>>> >>>>Okay, so between the not so related to programming full-time work, >>>>I've made some improvements to my 2D shooter game "Maximum >>>>Destruction" AND have been in touch with Mr. Paul Riche III (original >>>>SC2 designer) and UR Quan Masters development team. >>>> >>>>Both of them allowed me to use the SC2 game images in Fedora's >>>>"Extras" portion for free and non-commercial purposes only. >>> >>>Thats incompatible with Fedora packaging guidelines. A written license >>>should be included that is Free and/or open source is required. >>> >> >>My understanding was that you only *had* to provide a written license if >>the upstream supplied one. I could be wrong tho.... >> >>My libedit package is an example of this, no upstream license, but its >>been approved and is currently packaged with out a license file. >> >>I would recommend that Victor requests a license to be provided in the >>future (I did this for libedit), but the written license is only >>required if one is already supplied. > > > I would consider this bad practise. End users and developers should be > able to look at the licensing terms easily. I suggest that FESCo discuss > this. FWIW, the Games SIG has an additional packaging guideline that requires license files for games to always be included. If anyone from the SIG reviews this game then they will raise the issue at that time as well. - --Wart -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEQn7QDeYlPfs40g8RAl2lAJwNuL1cYwLRWS1u7bT7lac3X7zFCgCcDlKv O8+7ftu3dqWpvSRiGROtIdw= =/E2B -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From wart at kobold.org Sun Apr 16 19:00:58 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Wart) Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 12:00:58 -0700 Subject: Comps, or, Making it Easier for Users to Find Software In-Reply-To: <1142054562.2915.4.camel@aglarond.local> References: <1142054562.2915.4.camel@aglarond.local> Message-ID: <4442946A.40507@kobold.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jeremy Katz wrote: > With FC5 on the way and the advent of the repo-aware replacement for > system-config-packages (pirut), we're now in a much better position for > making it easy for users to gain access to applications. > > So, you might ask, what can I do to help? Well, if you maintain an > application which makes sense for a user to select[1], check out the > comps module and make sure that your package is listed in a reasonable > group in the comps-fe5.xml.in file. If it's not, feel free to add it > using the following as a template if your package were named "foo": > foo > If you think there needs to be a new group, please let me know. > > We'll eventually have the file being automatically updated with each > Extras push -- for now, it's a manual process for me to drop the updated > file in. > > Jeremy > > [1] So, what criteria makes sense here? In general, it's going to be > applications which show up in the menus somewhere. Libraries should > almost *never* be explicitly listed and instead pulled in via > dependencies. Also, most text-mode utilities don't really fit in unless > they have a pretty large established user-base. Given that the primary > use is with a GUI, selecting a lot of text-mode things make little > sense. If you have questions as to whether it makes sense or not, feel > free to contact me. Hi Jeremy, A number of new games have been added to Fedora Extras and the comps-fe5.xml.in file since you announced this, but they don't show up when running "yum groupinfo games" (or in the pirut 'games' category) on a FE5 system. 'worminator' and 'freedoom' are two examples of games that don't show up, yet are listed in comps-fe5.xml.in. The Games SIG has been adding quite a few new packages lately. Is there something that we can do to help automate the update of comps-fe5.xml? Additionaly, it seems that the FE games are listed as 'optional' packages in yum, which means that users can't use 'yum groupinstall games' as a shortcut to get all of them. What determines if a package is 'optional' or 'required'? Would it be possible to change it so that users can get all of the games via 'yum groupinstall', either by reclassifying the FE5 games as 'required', or by creating a new category for these games? - --Mike -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEQpRpDeYlPfs40g8RAsqFAJ9B5ozZ8M/Twhlw1GUt0gTT3tuWsgCdF9KO D67aKeFoF4FbmDPC6ZQhHRg= =bPZo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From vic_sk at yahoo.com Sun Apr 16 19:51:17 2006 From: vic_sk at yahoo.com (Victor Skovorodnikov) Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 12:51:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <4440A0E7.9080804@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <20060416195117.22289.qmail@web32615.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi all, I've sent the email with a licensing request to every resource I am using the images from (some of them are mine so I'll offer a license). If all else fails, I'll just draw the rest of the images myself. It's just I am more of a programmer than a graphical artist. But drawing things would be a nice change from programming too. Thanks for your comments! Victor. Hans de Goede wrote: Tim Jackson wrote: > Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: >> */Rahul Sundaram /* wrote: >> >> Thats incompatible with Fedora packaging guidelines. A written >> license >> should be included that is Free and/or open source is required. >> >> >> Should I get this written license from Paul Riche III, UR Quan Masters >> developers or can I write it myself? > > You need to get it from him; as the author, he is the only person that > can set the licensing terms. And in case you missed the subtlety in > Rahul's message, it's not the "written license should be included" bit > which is so much of a problem (though you should indeed include a text > file with the package containing the license as written by the author). > The main problem is the fact that the license he gave you isn't a Free > software license and is therefore still incompatible with Fedora. > > ("free for non-commercial purposes" isn't Free in this context; we're > talking about freedom not free-from-charge here; see: > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-76294f12c6b481792eb001ba9763d95e2792e825 > > > and, for some background: > > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html > > ) > To be more exact, we're talking about images here, so content not code, thus you only need a license which allows free (gratis and unlimited) redistribution of the images with your game. This still means that the non-commercial clause is unacceptable though. Also where did you get the sound FX? those need to be properly licensed too. Regards, Hans -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list --------------------------------- Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rc040203 at freenet.de Sun Apr 16 22:06:43 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 00:06:43 +0200 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <44427ED2.9080501@kobold.org> References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> <1145186731.349.25.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44427ED2.9080501@kobold.org> Message-ID: <1145225204.8213.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 10:28 -0700, Wart wrote: > FWIW, the Games SIG has an additional packaging guideline that requires > license files for games to always be included. What for? This is non-sense. The licensing situation of a package depends on much more then a "detached license file". I regret to say this, but you guys are trying to over-engineer an issue you apparently are not sufficiently qualified for. Ralf From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Mon Apr 17 09:14:28 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 11:14:28 +0200 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <1145225204.8213.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> <1145186731.349.25.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44427ED2.9080501@kobold.org> <1145225204.8213.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <44435C74.7010704@hhs.nl> Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 10:28 -0700, Wart wrote: > >> FWIW, the Games SIG has an additional packaging guideline that requires >> license files for games to always be included. > What for? This is non-sense. > > The licensing situation of a package depends on much more then a > "detached license file". I regret to say this, but you guys are trying > to over-engineer an issue you apparently are not sufficiently qualified > for. > Erm, Shooting from the hip again Ralph. Precisely because games sometime can come with pretty dodgy licenses we have added this requirement. Also I for one say that you are partly right, this should really be in the standard Packaging Guidelines. Packages should always include the license unless they are sub-packages in which case the main package should always include the license. Regards, Hans From gemi at bluewin.ch Mon Apr 17 12:02:09 2006 From: gemi at bluewin.ch (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard?= Milmeister) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:02:09 +0200 Subject: Proposal for a reorganization of "info" documentation Message-ID: <1145275329.12372.8.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> In the newest release, yelp supports GNU info documentation. This makes info accessible to people who do not use Emacs or who don't know of the info command. However the info categories are rather disorganized. For examples development tools are distributed in different groups, e.g., "Programming", "Programming Tools", "Programming tools", etc. Normally install-info uses information from the info file itself to select the group and the entry, and there is not restriction to what this can be. The --section option however allows to specify where the entry should be placed. I propose to ignore the information in the info file and ALWAYS use the --section option when installing. The argument must then be selected from a given list. If necessary, the --entry option can also be given to make the entry clearer. -- G?rard Milmeister Langackerstrasse 49 CH-8057 Z?rich From rc040203 at freenet.de Mon Apr 17 12:10:33 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:10:33 +0200 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <44435C74.7010704@hhs.nl> References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> <1145186731.349.25.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44427ED2.9080501@kobold.org> <1145225204.8213.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <44435C74.7010704@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1145275833.8213.112.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Mon, 2006-04-17 at 11:14 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 10:28 -0700, Wart wrote: > > > >> FWIW, the Games SIG has an additional packaging guideline that requires > >> license files for games to always be included. > > What for? This is non-sense. > > > > The licensing situation of a package depends on much more then a > > "detached license file". I regret to say this, but you guys are trying > > to over-engineer an issue you apparently are not sufficiently qualified > > for. > > > > Erm, > > Shooting from the hip again Ralph. Precisely because games sometime can > come with pretty dodgy licenses we have added this requirement. The point is: This requirement is legal non-sense and probably void. If you had checked with competent persons you'd have noticed, that certain circles in the US legal system consider detached license files to be void in general. One party sharing this opinion is the FSF (contact Eben Moglen if you want a definitive answer). > Also I > for one say that you are partly right, this should really be in the > standard Packaging Guidelines. This would be very restrictive and IMSHO is complete non-sense: Most non-trivial packages aren't covered by "one license", but are covered my many different licenses, covering different parts of a package, covering different aspects of a package (sources, run-time, files, contents) > Packages should always include the > license unless they are sub-packages in which case the main package > should always include the license. This is your personal preference. It's legally irrelevant and can't be enforced. If developers chose not to follow your personal preference, there is nothing you can do. If you add such a license file to satisfy your personal preference, this either means relicensing the original software, therefore makes you liable for the package and for potentially breaking licenses/copyrights, or it is "just informative" and irrelevant. Ralf From rc040203 at freenet.de Mon Apr 17 12:14:44 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:14:44 +0200 Subject: Proposal for a reorganization of "info" documentation In-Reply-To: <1145275329.12372.8.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> References: <1145275329.12372.8.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> Message-ID: <1145276084.8213.117.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Mon, 2006-04-17 at 14:02 +0200, G?rard Milmeister wrote: > In the newest release, yelp supports GNU info documentation. > This makes info accessible to people who do not use Emacs or > who don't know of the info command. > However the info categories are rather disorganized. For > examples development tools are distributed in different > groups, e.g., "Programming", "Programming Tools", "Programming tools", > etc. Normally install-info uses information from the info file > itself to select the group and the entry, and there is not restriction > to what this can be. The --section option however allows to specify > where the entry should be placed. I propose to ignore the information > in the info file and ALWAYS use the --section option when installing. I am opposed to this proposal. Info files are designed and documented the way you describe, so all you are doing is adding more overhead, incompatibility and confusion. If you are dissatisfied with an info's categorization, better contact upstream and ask them for changing it. Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 13:27:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 09:27:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187964] Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171327.k3HDRuCY010737@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bsd-games - A collection of text-based games https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187964 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-17 09:27 EST ------- Buffer overflow in sail, CVE-2006-1744: http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2006-1744 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From yeti at physics.muni.cz Mon Apr 17 14:11:03 2006 From: yeti at physics.muni.cz (David Necas (Yeti)) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:11:03 +0200 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <1145275833.8213.112.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> <1145186731.349.25.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44427ED2.9080501@kobold.org> <1145225204.8213.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <44435C74.7010704@hhs.nl> <1145275833.8213.112.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20060417141103.GE9290@potato.chello.upc.cz> On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 02:10:33PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > If you had checked with competent persons you'd have noticed, that > certain circles in the US legal system consider detached license files > to be void in general. Certain circles in the legal system of my country (well, not just certain circles, it seems to be a general consensus) consider GNU GPL void and unenforceable altogether. What do you suggest? To stop using GNU GPL? Yeti -- That's enough. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 14:39:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 10:39:55 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188623] Review Request: SOAPpy - Full-featured SOAP library for Python In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171439.k3HEdttA025038@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SOAPpy - Full-featured SOAP library for Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188623 wart at kobold.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |wart at kobold.org OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org 2006-04-17 10:39 EST ------- MUST ==== * rpmlint output clean * Source matches upstream. md5sum: 51ac835366badedd932c64f26fa8336b SOAPpy-0.11.6.tar.gz * License (PSFL) ok, license file included * Package and spec file named appropriately * Spec file legible and in Am. English * Builds and packages in mock on FC-4 i386, FC-4 x86_64, devel i386, devel x86_64 * No locales * No shared libraries * Not relocatable * buildroot cleaned in at beginning of %install and in %clean * No duplicate files * Macro use consistent * Contains code, not content * No -devel package necessary * No .la archives * No .desktop file needed * Owns all directories that it creates. SHOULD ====== * There are some unit tests in the tests subdirectory. Consider running the test suite in the spec file to verify that the package works. * There are a lot of example scripts in contrib/, bid/, validate that could be included as example code in %doc. MUSTFIX ======= * Is BuildRequires: PyXML necessary? It seems to build fine without it. * The files in the docs subdirectory need to be added to %doc. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 14:53:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 10:53:05 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188105] Review Request: torque In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171453.k3HEr5Vi029648@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-04-17 10:52 EST ------- Hi Garrick, this isn't a full review but I'm hoping to find more time to look at it later this week. good: rpmlint output basically unchanged from previous comments OK - follows naming guidelines OK - license seems acceptable and included OK - spec file is not as simple as it could be and it contains a number of conditional options that are a little time-consuming to read and (try to) understand -- but having looked at them I don't see any actual blockers OK - builds in mock on FC5 i386 OK - dir ownership and permissions look fine OK - libs seem fine and no *.la files OK - code not content nits: - the [ "$RPM_BUILD_ROOT" != "/" ] is not necessary for FE - If you'd like to have the same version of torque in, say, FE4, FE5, and devel then you'll probably want to add %{?dist} per http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag - perhaps the headers currently located at /usr/include/* could go in a subdir such as /usr/include/torque/* since some of the header files have rather unfortunately generic names (eg. "tm.h") blockers: - How can I verify that the source matches upstream? I found the download pages at: http://www.clusterresources.com/downloads/torque/snapshots/ but I can't seem to find the same .tar.gz file or a way to create an identical one from CVS -- could you please document that step within the spec file as a comment so that I can repeat it? Or perhaps use one of the "official" tar files? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From notting at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 15:37:41 2006 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 11:37:41 -0400 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060414135622.GG4650@free.fr> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414135622.GG4650@free.fr> Message-ID: <20060417153741.GB18516@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Patrice Dumas (pertusus at free.fr) said: > > We cannot do that as long as we lack a well-defined life-cycle compared > > with Fedora Core. And when we distinguish between active (i.e. maintained, > > I don't see why fedora extras would be a second class citizen if it hasn't > a well-defined life-cycle. This seems unimportant with regard with other > issues like packages cleaness, time to respond on bug reports, willing to > track new things and completness of packages offer. If someone uses Fedora Core 5, they can be certain that the content will be maintained up until point X, and after that it will be looked at for security issues by the existing Fedora Legacy team (which they can join.) With Extras... it's 'maybe, depending on the package'. Do you really expect someone to look at a web page that has maintenance status for 3000 packages? Bill From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 15:32:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 11:32:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188351] Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171532.k3HFWKi7004592@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188351 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |wtogami at redhat.com OtherBugsDependingO|163779 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-04-17 11:32 EST ------- Precomplied binaries are unacceptable. It must be built from scratch, and maybe in its own package that this depends on. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From vic_sk at yahoo.com Mon Apr 17 15:45:05 2006 From: vic_sk at yahoo.com (Victor Skovorodnikov) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 08:45:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <20060417141103.GE9290@potato.chello.upc.cz> Message-ID: <20060417154505.52042.qmail@web32606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> HI all, Could somebody please tell me the exact wording that should be provided with the license please? Thank you, Victor. "David Necas (Yeti)" wrote: On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 02:10:33PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > If you had checked with competent persons you'd have noticed, that > certain circles in the US legal system consider detached license files > to be void in general. Certain circles in the legal system of my country (well, not just certain circles, it seems to be a general consensus) consider GNU GPL void and unenforceable altogether. What do you suggest? To stop using GNU GPL? Yeti -- That's enough. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list --------------------------------- Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 15:40:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 11:40:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188478] Review Request: fxload-2002_04_11.spec In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171540.k3HFeNTG006895@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fxload-2002_04_11.spec https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188478 ------- Additional Comments From notting at redhat.com 2006-04-17 11:40 EST ------- # Copyright (c) 2001-2002 by Cypress Semiconductor Corporation # # Cypress Semiconductor Corporation hereby grants a copyright license to # use or redistribute this firmware image, in text or binary form as # required, only in conjunction with devices using a Cypress USB # microcontroller. Every copy in any form of the firmware shall include # Cypress copyright legends. is at the top of a3load.hex. Is this really suitable for disiribution, in source or binary format? (Note that this was never shipped at least in binary format in the core package.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 15:43:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 11:43:47 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188138] Review Request: mod_auth_ntlm_winbind - NTLM authentication for the Apache web server using winbind daemon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171543.k3HFhlQn007876@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mod_auth_ntlm_winbind - NTLM authentication for the Apache web server using winbind daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188138 dmitry at butskoy.name changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |mod_ntlm_winbind - NTLM |mod_auth_ntlm_winbind - NTLM |authentication for the |authentication for the |Apache web server using |Apache web server using |winbind daemon |winbind daemon ------- Additional Comments From dmitry at butskoy.name 2006-04-17 11:43 EST ------- - According to upstream, rename to "mod_auth_ntlm_winbind" - Update to the latest svn source - Add (temporary) coredumps patch by upstream co-author (will be in SVN soon too). New SPEC: http://dmitry.butskoy.name/mod_auth_ntlm_winbind/mod_auth_ntlm_winbind.spec New SRPM: http://dmitry.butskoy.name/mod_auth_ntlm_winbind/mod_auth_ntlm_winbind-20060408-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From rc040203 at freenet.de Mon Apr 17 16:30:20 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 18:30:20 +0200 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <20060417154505.52042.qmail@web32606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060417154505.52042.qmail@web32606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1145291420.8213.166.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Mon, 2006-04-17 at 08:45 -0700, Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > HI all, > > Could somebody please tell me the exact wording that should be > provided with the license please? Nobody will be able to tell you - It would depend on various details[1]. If you are a package's files copyright owner you will have to chose the license you want your files to be put under. If you are not a package's files copyright owner, but if the original copyright owner granted you a license allowing relicensing, you can chose another license under the restrictions he granted to you (E.g. many BSD-like licensed files can be relicensed under the GPL). In all other cases, all you can do is to replicate the original wording (word by word) the copyright owner uses in his license. If the original files are not accompanied or do not carry inlined licensing terms, the package's licensing has to be considered unclear, which will probably result in your package to be "not distributable". Ralf [1] But as I said before: Unless you are explicitly relicensing a package, this file's contents is legally irrelevant and void. The original files' copyrights and licensing terms overrule whatever you would put into your file. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 16:29:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 12:29:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187317] Review Request: mindi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171629.k3HGTulN017203@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mindi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187317 gauret at free.fr changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |gauret at free.fr CC|gauret at free.fr | OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From gauret at free.fr 2006-04-17 12:28 EST ------- Needs work : * No need to define all tags at the top of the spec file. Just use the rpm tags, that will define the proper variables. * BuildRoot should be %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#BuildRoot) * Non standard group Archiving/Archiving (you can use Applications/Archiving) * Some paths are not replaced with RPM macros (wiki: QAChecklist item 7) (in the scriptlet) * No downloadable source. Please give the full URL in the Source tag. * The BuildRoot must be cleaned at the beginning of %install, not in %prep (it breaks rpmbuild --short-circuit) * The build should be done in %build, and only the install in %install (as a result, you can't use the install.sh script) * The scriptlets should never output anything. It can break some graphical installers, and installation can be unattended. * The /etc/mindi directory is not owned * File list: some files were listed multiple times (wiki: Packaging/ReviewGuidelines) : %{_libdir}/mindi is recursive, you'd better set the correct mode in %install and get rid of the last 3 lines of the %files section. * You need to add a changelog entry -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 16:47:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 12:47:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171647.k3HGlKu4022130@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-17 12:47 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodevelop.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodevelop-0.10-4.src.rpm More fixes and a slimmed down spec file -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 16:50:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 12:50:02 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178900] Review Request: monodoc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171650.k3HGo2ql022597@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: monodoc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178900 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-17 12:49 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodoc.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodoc-1.1.13-3.src.rpm Large spec file change -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 17:06:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:06:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182305] Review Request: pyspi - Python bindings for AT-SPI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171706.k3HH6sK9027410@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pyspi - Python bindings for AT-SPI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182305 ------- Additional Comments From zcerza at redhat.com 2006-04-17 13:06 EST ------- Thanks again, and sorry for the delay. I've just queued a build for the devel branch, and requested an FC5 branch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 17:07:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:07:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182306] Review Request: dogtail - GUI test tool and automation framework In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171707.k3HH7CSv027460@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: dogtail - GUI test tool and automation framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182306 ------- Additional Comments From zcerza at redhat.com 2006-04-17 13:07 EST ------- Thanks again, and sorry for the delay. I've just queued a build for the devel branch, and requested an FC5 branch. The URL is fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 17:24:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:24:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182306] Review Request: dogtail - GUI test tool and automation framework In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171724.k3HHOErU031583@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: dogtail - GUI test tool and automation framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182306 zcerza at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From zcerza at redhat.com 2006-04-17 13:24 EST ------- Builds succeeded! yay. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 17:24:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:24:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182305] Review Request: pyspi - Python bindings for AT-SPI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171724.k3HHOKFN031640@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pyspi - Python bindings for AT-SPI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182305 zcerza at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From zcerza at redhat.com 2006-04-17 13:24 EST ------- Builds succeeded! yay. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 17:24:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:24:27 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182305] Review Request: pyspi - Python bindings for AT-SPI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171724.k3HHORxE031697@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pyspi - Python bindings for AT-SPI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182305 zcerza at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From zcerza at redhat.com 2006-04-17 13:24 EST ------- Builds succeeded! yay. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 17:24:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:24:44 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182306] Review Request: dogtail - GUI test tool and automation framework In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171724.k3HHOi5W031843@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: dogtail - GUI test tool and automation framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182306 Bug 182306 depends on bug 182305, which changed state. Bug 182305 Summary: Review Request: pyspi - Python bindings for AT-SPI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182305 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From wtogami at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 17:48:14 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:48:14 -0400 Subject: Extras Reviews Migration Done Message-ID: <4443D4DE.5020006@redhat.com> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review All package reviews for both Core and Extras should now be delivered to this read-only mailing list. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From katzj at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 17:57:41 2006 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:57:41 -0400 Subject: Comps, or, Making it Easier for Users to Find Software In-Reply-To: <4442946A.40507@kobold.org> References: <1142054562.2915.4.camel@aglarond.local> <4442946A.40507@kobold.org> Message-ID: <1145296661.26993.72.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 12:00 -0700, Wart wrote: > A number of new games have been added to Fedora Extras and the > comps-fe5.xml.in file since you announced this, but they don't show up > when running "yum groupinfo games" (or in the pirut 'games' category) on > a FE5 system. 'worminator' and 'freedoom' are two examples of games > that don't show up, yet are listed in comps-fe5.xml.in. > > The Games SIG has been adding quite a few new packages lately. Is there > something that we can do to help automate the update of comps-fe5.xml? My apologies. The problem is that there's not yet anything to handle automated moving of what's in CVS to what's in the actual tree. This should probably be done as one part of the scripted tree push process. I've gone ahead and manually updated it again and generally, this should go a little better for a while since I'm back from vacation, LinuxWorld, and a doomed week of meetings :-) One thing that would help is a script to be run as a pre-commit check to ensure the file is well-formed. > Additionaly, it seems that the FE games are listed as 'optional' > packages in yum, which means that users can't use 'yum groupinstall > games' as a shortcut to get all of them. What determines if a package > is 'optional' or 'required'? Would it be possible to change it so that > users can get all of the games via 'yum groupinstall', either by > reclassifying the FE5 games as 'required', or by creating a new category > for these games? If a package is required, then the group isn't considered installed without the package being installed. You almost certainly don't want that behavior with all of the games :-) And I don't even think a separate category is really what's wanted. What problem are you trying to solve by installing all of the games?[1] Jeremy [1] Note, that it would be pretty easy to write the little tool using the yum interfaces that just installed all of the optional packages in a group. From wart at kobold.org Mon Apr 17 18:20:52 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Michael Thomas) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 11:20:52 -0700 Subject: Comps, or, Making it Easier for Users to Find Software In-Reply-To: <1145296661.26993.72.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> References: <1142054562.2915.4.camel@aglarond.local> <4442946A.40507@kobold.org> <1145296661.26993.72.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <4443DC84.60706@kobold.org> Jeremy Katz wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 12:00 -0700, Wart wrote: > >>A number of new games have been added to Fedora Extras and the >>comps-fe5.xml.in file since you announced this, but they don't show up >>when running "yum groupinfo games" (or in the pirut 'games' category) on >>a FE5 system. 'worminator' and 'freedoom' are two examples of games >>that don't show up, yet are listed in comps-fe5.xml.in. >> >>The Games SIG has been adding quite a few new packages lately. Is there >>something that we can do to help automate the update of comps-fe5.xml? > > > My apologies. The problem is that there's not yet anything to handle > automated moving of what's in CVS to what's in the actual tree. This > should probably be done as one part of the scripted tree push process. > I've gone ahead and manually updated it again and generally, this should > go a little better for a while since I'm back from vacation, LinuxWorld, > and a doomed week of meetings :-) Thanks! > One thing that would help is a script to be run as a pre-commit check to > ensure the file is well-formed. I'll ask the SIG to see if we can come up with something. What are the rules for pre-commit scripts in terms of languages, locations, dependencies, etc.? Or is it enough to run xmlwf on the file? >>Additionaly, it seems that the FE games are listed as 'optional' >>packages in yum, which means that users can't use 'yum groupinstall >>games' as a shortcut to get all of them. What determines if a package >>is 'optional' or 'required'? Would it be possible to change it so that >>users can get all of the games via 'yum groupinstall', either by >>reclassifying the FE5 games as 'required', or by creating a new category >>for these games? > > > If a package is required, then the group isn't considered installed > without the package being installed. You almost certainly don't want > that behavior with all of the games :-) And I don't even think a > separate category is really what's wanted. What problem are you trying > to solve by installing all of the games?[1] The ultimate problem is that I'm trying to avoid doing any real work. :) I'd like to be able to install all of the games with one command after an initial system install, and later use one command to pull in any new games that have since been added to the repo. > Jeremy > > [1] Note, that it would be pretty easy to write the little tool using > the yum interfaces that just installed all of the optional packages in a > group. That's what I did for now, which is when I discovered that 'yum groupinfo' didn't list them all. Perhaps there could be an option to 'yum groupinstall' to install optional packages, such as "yum --includeoptional groupinstall games". --Mike -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3820 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From bugs.michael at gmx.net Mon Apr 17 19:00:37 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 21:00:37 +0200 Subject: Your Fedora glows blue for a moment In-Reply-To: <1145186548.349.22.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> References: <44415936.3060600@kobold.org> <1145186548.349.22.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060417210037.f20456a2.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 16:52:28 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 13:36 -0700, Wart wrote: > > > > A group of game developers, packagers, and enthusiasts have > > gathered together as the Games Special Interest Group (SIG) in > > Fedora Extras. We have conspired to form a new mailing list > > (http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-games-list) and > > IRC channel (#fedora-games on irc.freenode.net). > > > > The SIG is involved in several activities related to the > > promotion of Games in Fedora. We actively seek out new games, > > game-related libraries, and game development tools to package. > > We review each other package submissions to expedite the approval > > process. We strive to document the games that we package so that > > users can get an idea of what the game is like before they > > install and play it. We discuss new packaging guidelines > > specific to game packages. > > > > Of course, we also tend to play them a lot as well. :) > > > > Join us on #fedora-games or on fedora-games-list at redhat.com if > > you'd like to help out the open-source gaming community. > > Great initiative. Rock on. Seeing that what had started as only a spontaneous idea (with an admittedly unimaginative name and acronym) even found its way into FUDCon presentations, haha, interesting and entertaining. :) From katzj at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 19:04:58 2006 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:04:58 -0400 Subject: Comps, or, Making it Easier for Users to Find Software In-Reply-To: <4443DC84.60706@kobold.org> References: <1142054562.2915.4.camel@aglarond.local> <4442946A.40507@kobold.org> <1145296661.26993.72.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> <4443DC84.60706@kobold.org> Message-ID: <1145300698.26993.96.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> On Mon, 2006-04-17 at 11:20 -0700, Michael Thomas wrote: > Jeremy Katz wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 12:00 -0700, Wart wrote: > > One thing that would help is a script to be run as a pre-commit check to > > ensure the file is well-formed. > > I'll ask the SIG to see if we can come up with something. What are the > rules for pre-commit scripts in terms of languages, locations, > dependencies, etc.? Or is it enough to run xmlwf on the file? The XML file just needs to be well-formed. Eventually, translations will be getting merged in, but that's the "easy" part. And dependencies also don't need to be specified as those get resolved at runtime > >>Additionaly, it seems that the FE games are listed as 'optional' > >>packages in yum, which means that users can't use 'yum groupinstall > >>games' as a shortcut to get all of them. What determines if a package > >>is 'optional' or 'required'? Would it be possible to change it so that > >>users can get all of the games via 'yum groupinstall', either by > >>reclassifying the FE5 games as 'required', or by creating a new category > >>for these games? > > > > > > If a package is required, then the group isn't considered installed > > without the package being installed. You almost certainly don't want > > that behavior with all of the games :-) And I don't even think a > > separate category is really what's wanted. What problem are you trying > > to solve by installing all of the games?[1] > > The ultimate problem is that I'm trying to avoid doing any real work. > :) I'd like to be able to install all of the games with one command > after an initial system install, and later use one command to pull in > any new games that have since been added to the repo. Heh ;) > > Jeremy > > > > [1] Note, that it would be pretty easy to write the little tool using > > the yum interfaces that just installed all of the optional packages in a > > group. > > That's what I did for now, which is when I discovered that 'yum > groupinfo' didn't list them all. Perhaps there could be an option to > 'yum groupinstall' to install optional packages, such as > "yum --includeoptional groupinstall games". Yeah, I'm thinking that something like this is probably the best approach to the problem. It shouldn't be that hard to add support for both * yum groupinstall --alloptional foo and * yum groupinstall --requiredonly foo to yum. Anyone want to volunteer to write the patch? :-) Jeremy From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Mon Apr 17 19:29:26 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 20:29:26 +0100 Subject: [Fwd: Could someone have a look for approval?] Message-ID: <1145302166.3667.28.camel@T7.Linux> -- Computer sind Klimaanlagen sehr ?hnlich: beide funktionieren, es sei denn man ?ffnet die Fenster -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Paul Subject: Could someone have a look for approval? Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 18:19:20 +0100 Size: 1599 URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From tibbs at math.uh.edu Mon Apr 17 19:36:01 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:36:01 -0500 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <1145275833.8213.112.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> (Ralf Corsepius's message of "Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:10:33 +0200") References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> <1145186731.349.25.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44427ED2.9080501@kobold.org> <1145225204.8213.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <44435C74.7010704@hhs.nl> <1145275833.8213.112.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: >>>>> "RC" == Ralf Corsepius writes: RC> The point is: This requirement is legal non-sense and probably RC> void. Why on earth would this have anything to do with legality? The requirement is there for clarity; games often have custom licenses that aren't easily summarized in the 20 characters that the RPM License: tag gives us. People need to be able to see the license for the game files summarized as documentation instead of plowing through the source code. The only context in which the requirement would be void would be that of Fedora Extras, and then only if the steering committee declared that the Games SIG can't place that additional restriction. Which they haven't. So just what are you objecting to? - J< From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 19:30:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:30:19 -0400 Subject: [Bug 187913] Review Request: mysql-query-browser In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171930.k3HJUJDM015803@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mysql-query-browser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187913 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-04-17 15:30 EST ------- I was unable to re-create this error on my FC5 box. Everything seemed fine. Michel Alandre Salim: did you happen to notice any errors/warnings when you compiled the package? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 19:30:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:30:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188105] Review Request: torque In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171930.k3HJUdrW015902@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 ------- Additional Comments From garrick at usc.edu 2006-04-17 15:30 EST ------- (In reply to comment #12) > nits: > - the [ "$RPM_BUILD_ROOT" != "/" ] is not necessary for FE Ok, will remove. > - If you'd like to have the same version of torque in, say, > FE4, FE5, and devel then you'll probably want to add > %{?dist} per http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag I was wondering about this, but I left it out because it isn't actually in the naming guidelines. > - perhaps the headers currently located at /usr/include/* > could go in a subdir such as /usr/include/torque/* since > some of the header files have rather unfortunately generic > names (eg. "tm.h") Sure. > blockers: > - How can I verify that the source matches upstream? I found > the download pages at: > > http://www.clusterresources.com/downloads/torque/snapshots/ > > but I can't seem to find the same .tar.gz file or a way to > create an identical one from CVS -- could you please document > that step within the spec file as a comment so that I can repeat > it? Or perhaps use one of the "official" tar files? I'll roll an "official" snapshot upstream and give you a new srpm in a few minutes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From tibbs at math.uh.edu Mon Apr 17 19:40:56 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:40:56 -0500 Subject: Extras Reviews Migration Done In-Reply-To: <4443D4DE.5020006@redhat.com> (Warren Togami's message of "Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:48:14 -0400") References: <4443D4DE.5020006@redhat.com> Message-ID: >>>>> "WT" == Warren Togami writes: WT> All package reviews for both Core and Extras should now be WT> delivered to this read-only mailing list. Is there ever any reason to reply by mail to one of these messages? If so, is fedora-maintainers really the proper place to direct replies? Maybe fedora-extras-list would be better, at least for Extras reviews? (I suspect it unfortunately isn't possible to vary the Reply-To: header.) - J< From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 19:48:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:48:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 186452] Review Request: kdebluetooth: The KDE Bluetooth Framework In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604171948.k3HJmWvn022242@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdebluetooth: The KDE Bluetooth Framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186452 ------- Additional Comments From rdieter at math.unl.edu 2006-04-17 15:48 EST ------- %changelog * Mon Apr 17 2006 Rex Dieter 1.0-0.9.beta1 - konqueror bluetooth:/ returns error "Bad URL" (kde bug #123607) Spec Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/kdebluetooth-1.0-0.9.beta1.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/kdebluetooth-1.0-0.9.beta1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From tibbs at math.uh.edu Mon Apr 17 20:12:02 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:12:02 -0500 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060417153741.GB18516@devserv.devel.redhat.com> (Bill Nottingham's message of "Mon, 17 Apr 2006 11:37:41 -0400") References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414135622.GG4650@free.fr> <20060417153741.GB18516@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: >>>>> "BN" == Bill Nottingham writes: BN> With Extras... it's 'maybe, depending on the package'. Do you BN> really expect someone to look at a web page that has maintenance BN> status for 3000 packages? The only thing I really care about is that I not be prevented from or overly encumbered in updating the packages I maintain for older Fedora releases. So if I just have to introduce myself to the extras-legacy team and say "I'll be maintaining denyhosts for FC-3" and don't have to go through additional process then I'm perfectly happy. But if I have to go through additional review or learn a different build system then I'm not sure it would be worth the trouble. - J< From wtogami at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 20:13:42 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:13:42 -0400 Subject: Extras Reviews Migration Done In-Reply-To: References: <4443D4DE.5020006@redhat.com> Message-ID: <4443F6F6.4050205@redhat.com> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: >>>>>> "WT" == Warren Togami writes: > > WT> All package reviews for both Core and Extras should now be > WT> delivered to this read-only mailing list. > > Is there ever any reason to reply by mail to one of these messages? > If so, is fedora-maintainers really the proper place to direct > replies? Maybe fedora-extras-list would be better, at least for > Extras reviews? (I suspect it unfortunately isn't possible to vary > the Reply-To: header.) In general you are supposed to reply to the Bugzilla reports themselves. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From notting at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 20:15:03 2006 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:15:03 -0400 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414135622.GG4650@free.fr> <20060417153741.GB18516@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060417201503.GF32157@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Jason L Tibbitts III (tibbs at math.uh.edu) said: > >>>>> "BN" == Bill Nottingham writes: > > BN> With Extras... it's 'maybe, depending on the package'. Do you > BN> really expect someone to look at a web page that has maintenance > BN> status for 3000 packages? > > The only thing I really care about is that I not be prevented from or > overly encumbered in updating the packages I maintain for older Fedora > releases. > > So if I just have to introduce myself to the extras-legacy team and > say "I'll be maintaining denyhosts for FC-3" and don't have to go > through additional process then I'm perfectly happy. But if I have to > go through additional review or learn a different build system then > I'm not sure it would be worth the trouble. The idea is to get Legacy building through the same sort of system as Extras... it's just not there yet. Bill From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 20:15:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:15:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188351] Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604172015.k3HKFcpW031246@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188351 ------- Additional Comments From rpm at timj.co.uk 2006-04-17 16:15 EST ------- Yes, I know. Looking at it, it appears that the presence of the pre-existing binaries may actually be accidental (perhaps an error during the release process?); I will discuss with the author. A "make clean; make" recompiles the objects in question cleanly, at least on x86; I will submit a new build shortly. The presence of the library (gtkscintilla, "moleskine" version) bundled in the package is intentional; the library is a modified version (compatible licensing - GPL) and is effectively unmaintained upstream so the gPHPEdit author hasn't got much choice but to bundle it. There were apparently extensive discussions during the Debian packaging process for the same reason (I understand they hate multiple copies of libraries with a vengeance) and it was agreed there that bundling is appropriate in this case. (Note I am treating "bundling of libraries" and "distribution of precompiled binaries" as totally separate issues here) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr Mon Apr 17 20:38:02 2006 From: eric.tanguy at univ-nantes.fr (Eric Tanguy) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 22:38:02 +0200 Subject: Comps, or, Making it Easier for Users to Find Software In-Reply-To: <1145300698.26993.96.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> References: <1142054562.2915.4.camel@aglarond.local> <4442946A.40507@kobold.org> <1145296661.26993.72.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> <4443DC84.60706@kobold.org> <1145300698.26993.96.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1145306282.2536.7.camel@bureau.maison> Le lundi 17 avril 2006 ? 15:04 -0400, Jeremy Katz a ?crit : > On Mon, 2006-04-17 at 11:20 -0700, Michael Thomas wrote: > > Jeremy Katz wrote: > > > On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 12:00 -0700, Wart wrote: > > > One thing that would help is a script to be run as a pre-commit check to > > > ensure the file is well-formed. > > > > I'll ask the SIG to see if we can come up with something. What are the > > rules for pre-commit scripts in terms of languages, locations, > > dependencies, etc.? Or is it enough to run xmlwf on the file? > > The XML file just needs to be well-formed. Eventually, translations > will be getting merged in, but that's the "easy" part. And dependencies > also don't need to be specified as those get resolved at runtime > > > >>Additionaly, it seems that the FE games are listed as 'optional' > > >>packages in yum, which means that users can't use 'yum groupinstall > > >>games' as a shortcut to get all of them. What determines if a package > > >>is 'optional' or 'required'? Would it be possible to change it so that > > >>users can get all of the games via 'yum groupinstall', either by > > >>reclassifying the FE5 games as 'required', or by creating a new category > > >>for these games? > > > > > > > > > If a package is required, then the group isn't considered installed > > > without the package being installed. You almost certainly don't want > > > that behavior with all of the games :-) And I don't even think a > > > separate category is really what's wanted. What problem are you trying > > > to solve by installing all of the games?[1] > > > > The ultimate problem is that I'm trying to avoid doing any real work. > > :) I'd like to be able to install all of the games with one command > > after an initial system install, and later use one command to pull in > > any new games that have since been added to the repo. > > Heh ;) > > > > Jeremy > > > > > > [1] Note, that it would be pretty easy to write the little tool using > > > the yum interfaces that just installed all of the optional packages in a > > > group. > > > > That's what I did for now, which is when I discovered that 'yum > > groupinfo' didn't list them all. Perhaps there could be an option to > > 'yum groupinstall' to install optional packages, such as > > "yum --includeoptional groupinstall games". > > Yeah, I'm thinking that something like this is probably the best > approach to the problem. It shouldn't be that hard to add support for > both > * yum groupinstall --alloptional foo > and > * yum groupinstall --requiredonly foo > > to yum. Anyone want to volunteer to write the patch? :-) > > Jeremy > I have one more question : i have updated comps-fe5.xml.in in cvs since a while and i never see the modifications i did in a repodata. For example i added qucs to Engineering and Scientific but i can't see it in the repoview. There is something i made wrong ? Eric From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 20:37:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:37:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188351] Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604172037.k3HKbU9p006686@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gphpedit - GNOME2 PHP editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188351 rpm at timj.co.uk changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From rpm at timj.co.uk 2006-04-17 16:37 EST ------- Looking healthier now; the current version now builds on all archs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 20:38:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:38:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188623] Review Request: SOAPpy - Full-featured SOAP library for Python In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604172038.k3HKcVut007293@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SOAPpy - Full-featured SOAP library for Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188623 ------- Additional Comments From tkmame at retrogames.com 2006-04-17 16:38 EST ------- Spec URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/SOAPpy.spec SRPM URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/ * Mon Apr 17 2006 Christopher Stone 0.11.6-2 - Add docs directory to %doc - Remove PyXML BR - Removed executable bits from doc files - Added call to run test script in %check - Added a patch to remove tests that fail - Added examples to %doc There are two tests that fail. One of the tests is _supposed_ to fail. I had to add a patch to comment out the tests that fail to allow rpmbuild to make the rpm. The test that fails which is supposed to pass prints this: ====================================================================== ERROR: testTime (__main__.SOAPTestCase) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "SOAPtest.py", line 2201, in testTime self.allTests(t, baddata, gooddata, parsedata) File "SOAPtest.py", line 1727, in allTests self.goodTest(t, gooddata) File "SOAPtest.py", line 1695, in goodTest d = x._marshalData() File "/home/build/SOAPpy-0.11.6/SOAPpy/Types.py", line 593, in _marshalData s = time.strftime("%H:%M:%S", (0, 0, 0) + d + (0, 0, -1)) ValueError: month out of range -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 20:45:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:45:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181599] Review Request: gallery: web based photo album software In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604172045.k3HKj9iF010219@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gallery: web based photo album software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181599 ------- Additional Comments From jwb at redhat.com 2006-04-17 16:45 EST ------- Any chance of a review on this? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 20:50:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:50:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188359] Review Request: bugzilla - bug tracking tool In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604172050.k3HKoSEB012375@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bugzilla - bug tracking tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188359 ------- Additional Comments From jwb at redhat.com 2006-04-17 16:50 EST ------- Any chance of a review on this package? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From katzj at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 20:57:03 2006 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:57:03 -0400 Subject: Comps, or, Making it Easier for Users to Find Software In-Reply-To: <1145306282.2536.7.camel@bureau.maison> References: <1142054562.2915.4.camel@aglarond.local> <4442946A.40507@kobold.org> <1145296661.26993.72.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> <4443DC84.60706@kobold.org> <1145300698.26993.96.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> <1145306282.2536.7.camel@bureau.maison> Message-ID: <1145307423.26993.108.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> On Mon, 2006-04-17 at 22:38 +0200, Eric Tanguy wrote: > I have one more question : i have updated comps-fe5.xml.in in cvs since > a while and i never see the modifications i did in a repodata. For > example i added qucs to Engineering and Scientific but i can't see it in > the repoview. There is something i made wrong ? I just did the first update today since the files were added -- so any updates should show up after the next Extras push Jeremy From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 21:06:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:06:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 183912] Review Request: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection Kit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604172106.k3HL6qIf019429@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection Kit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183912 ------- Additional Comments From green at redhat.com 2006-04-17 17:06 EST ------- (In reply to comment #9) > * Tue Apr 04 2006 Andy Shevchenko > - update to 0.101.1 I just tried this on x86, and it seems fine. Thanks for your effort - I hope this is approved soon. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Apr 17 21:17:01 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:17:01 -0400 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> <1145186731.349.25.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44427ED2.9080501@kobold.org> <1145225204.8213.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <44435C74.7010704@hhs.nl> <1145275833.8213.112.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <604aa7910604171417m7a2dcd3cl8fe895d05a382506@mail.gmail.com> On 4/17/06, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > The only context in which the requirement would be void would be that > of Fedora Extras, and then only if the steering committee declared > that the Games SIG can't place that additional restriction. Which > they haven't. So just what are you objecting to? Here's what I don't understand... can I a package a game and review a game as a normal Extras contributor without having to follow the additional requirements of the games SIG? -jef From vic_sk at yahoo.com Mon Apr 17 21:19:52 2006 From: vic_sk at yahoo.com (Victor Skovorodnikov) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:19:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: A licensing question In-Reply-To: <1145291420.8213.166.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20060417211952.6498.qmail@web32601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hello all, Would you please let me know if the following licensing formulation is acceptable for licensing of the SC2 images' art: "non-commercial attribution share-alike creative commons license" I was asked by the original SC2 developers to ask you this after my original request for licensing their images. Thank you very much, Victor. cc: Chris Nelson @ toysforbob Victor. --------------------------------- Blab-away for as little as 1?/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tibbs at math.uh.edu Mon Apr 17 21:21:34 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:21:34 -0500 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060417201503.GF32157@devserv.devel.redhat.com> (Bill Nottingham's message of "Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:15:03 -0400") References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414135622.GG4650@free.fr> <20060417153741.GB18516@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20060417201503.GF32157@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: >>>>> "BN" == Bill Nottingham writes: BN> The idea is to get Legacy building through the same sort of system BN> as Extras... it's just not there yet. What bothers me is that we already have "Extras Legacy" building and mirrored out just fine. I can push my a new FC-3 version and everything is taken care of. Why would we need to change that? It seems to me that the Extras Legacy team would just need to step in and commit fixes to the existing extras infrastructure. - J< From jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Apr 17 21:22:36 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:22:36 -0400 Subject: A licensing question In-Reply-To: <20060417211952.6498.qmail@web32601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <1145291420.8213.166.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060417211952.6498.qmail@web32601.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910604171422o32391289ld69571e1fc2443ad@mail.gmail.com> On 4/17/06, Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > Hello all, > > Would you please let me know if the following licensing formulation is > acceptable for licensing of the SC2 images' art: > > "non-commercial attribution share-alike creative commons license" "non-commercial" is unacceptable. -jef From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 21:26:01 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:26:01 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188105] Review Request: torque In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604172126.k3HLQ1IU027928@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 ------- Additional Comments From garrick at usc.edu 2006-04-17 17:25 EST ------- http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~garrick/torque-2.1.0p0-0.5.200604171430cvs.src.rpm http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~garrick/torque.spec * Mon Apr 17 2006 Garrick Staples 2.1.0p0-0.6.200604171430cvs - add %%{dist} tag - cleanup the cleanups in spec - bump to matching upstream - move headers to /usr/include/torque/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From pertusus at free.fr Mon Apr 17 21:39:01 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 23:39:01 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060417153741.GB18516@devserv.devel.redhat.com> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414135622.GG4650@free.fr> <20060417153741.GB18516@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060417213901.GA25203@free.fr> > If someone uses Fedora Core 5, they can be certain that the content will > be maintained up until point X, and after that it will be looked at for > security issues by the existing Fedora Legacy team (which they can join.) > > With Extras... it's 'maybe, depending on the package'. Do you really expect > someone to look at a web page that has maintenance status for 3000 packages? Not really. What I want is that each maintainer decide for his package what kind of maintainance he does. And only if he does none (and nobody steped up) the package should be taken by the fedora extra legacy team which may have an homogenous maintainance goal, or not. For the current extra the maintainance mode is inhomogenous, some packages are updated a lot, other aren't, some are unmaintained, maybe for some there are only security fixes backports. Is it a problem? No. Having an homogenous maintainance mode for extras packages for end of life fedora core distros seems to me to be an unnecessary goal which in my opinion puts constraints on the maintainers witout benefit. It also puts some constraints on the users, as some users may want different kind of maintainance for different packages, and if they agree with the maintainer on that this would only benefit them. I am not opposed at all to another repository with only security fixes backported to fedora extras packages, that would be great. But I don't think it is what fedora extra packages for eol fedora core should be. In my opinion it should basically be the same than fedora extras for living fedora core distros: same infrastructure, same requirements, same guidelines. -- Pat From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 21:33:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:33:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 182064] Review Request: facter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604172133.k3HLXkO7031233@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: facter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182064 ------- Additional Comments From dlutter at redhat.com 2006-04-17 17:33 EST ------- * Rebuilt RPM with tarball from upstream * Applied for cvsextras in account system (user 'lutter') Spec: http://people.redhat.com/dlutter/yum/spec/facter.spec SRPM: http://people.redhat.com/dlutter/yum/SRPMS/facter-1.1.4-4.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From notting at redhat.com Mon Apr 17 21:45:18 2006 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:45:18 -0400 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060417213901.GA25203@free.fr> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414135622.GG4650@free.fr> <20060417153741.GB18516@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20060417213901.GA25203@free.fr> Message-ID: <20060417214518.GA23349@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Patrice Dumas (pertusus at free.fr) said: > > If someone uses Fedora Core 5, they can be certain that the content will > > be maintained up until point X, and after that it will be looked at for > > security issues by the existing Fedora Legacy team (which they can join.) > > > > With Extras... it's 'maybe, depending on the package'. Do you really expect > > someone to look at a web page that has maintenance status for 3000 packages? > > Not really. ... > What I want is that each maintainer decide for his package what > kind of maintainance he does. And only if he does none (and nobody steped up) > the package should be taken by the fedora extra legacy team which may have > an homogenous maintainance goal, or not. So, how does that avoid the question I just stated? Bill From tibbs at math.uh.edu Mon Apr 17 21:50:49 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:50:49 -0500 Subject: Extras Reviews Migration Done In-Reply-To: <4443F6F6.4050205@redhat.com> (Warren Togami's message of "Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:13:42 -0400") References: <4443D4DE.5020006@redhat.com> <4443F6F6.4050205@redhat.com> Message-ID: >>>>> "WT" == Warren Togami writes: WT> In general you are supposed to reply to the Bugzilla reports WT> themselves. Well yeah, that's why I asked if there was ever any legitimate reason to reply by mail. If yes, then if fedora-maintainers really the proper destination? I've seen replies to the review requests in fedora-extras-list, and some of that discussion has been useful meta-discussion that wasn't appropriate for a bugzilla entry. - J< From wart at kobold.org Mon Apr 17 22:01:29 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Michael Thomas) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:01:29 -0700 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <604aa7910604171417m7a2dcd3cl8fe895d05a382506@mail.gmail.com> References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> <1145186731.349.25.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44427ED2.9080501@kobold.org> <1145225204.8213.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <44435C74.7010704@hhs.nl> <1145275833.8213.112.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <604aa7910604171417m7a2dcd3cl8fe895d05a382506@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <44441039.3090500@kobold.org> Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 4/17/06, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>The only context in which the requirement would be void would be that >>of Fedora Extras, and then only if the steering committee declared >>that the Games SIG can't place that additional restriction. Which >>they haven't. So just what are you objecting to? > > > Here's what I don't understand... can I a package a game and review a > game as a normal Extras contributor without having to follow the > additional requirements of the games SIG? Yes. The SIG only enforces these additional guidelines on packages reviewed by the SIG members. --Mike -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3820 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From pertusus at free.fr Mon Apr 17 22:05:28 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 00:05:28 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060417214518.GA23349@devserv.devel.redhat.com> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414135622.GG4650@free.fr> <20060417153741.GB18516@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20060417213901.GA25203@free.fr> <20060417214518.GA23349@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060417220528.GB25203@free.fr> > So, how does that avoid the question I just stated? I don't think there should be such a page for extras packages, both for eol fedora core versions and for current fedora core version. The users should trust the packager (and the fedora extras community) for doing the right kind of maintainance. If a user really wants to know what kind of maintainance is done he should either contact the maintainer or look at the cvs history or even enter a bug if he suppose the maintainer is doing things wrong. But I don't think this will happen a lot outside from users outside of the community if the issues of co-maintainership and bug responsivness are solved. -- Pat From tibbs at math.uh.edu Mon Apr 17 22:11:45 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:11:45 -0500 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <604aa7910604171417m7a2dcd3cl8fe895d05a382506@mail.gmail.com> (Jeff Spaleta's message of "Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:17:01 -0400") References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> <1145186731.349.25.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44427ED2.9080501@kobold.org> <1145225204.8213.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <44435C74.7010704@hhs.nl> <1145275833.8213.112.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <604aa7910604171417m7a2dcd3cl8fe895d05a382506@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: >>>>> "JS" == Jeff Spaleta writes: JS> Here's what I don't understand... can I a package a game and JS> review a game as a normal Extras contributor without having to JS> follow the additional requirements of the games SIG? Would you really want to? The Game SIG folks will happily review any game-related package that comes up, and generally they'll do so quickly. Of course they'll ask that you follow the minor additional bits so that all of the games are packaged consistently. I mean, the requirements aren't a huge deal and make a lot of sense. Would you really, say, bypass the guideline about dropping setgid privileges properly after the scoreboard file is opened, or the one about not running server daemons as root? But hey, if you don't agree with the reviewer, I suppose you can always ask for another one. I'm sure you'll get one eventually. - J< From gemi at bluewin.ch Mon Apr 17 22:15:35 2006 From: gemi at bluewin.ch (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard?= Milmeister) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 00:15:35 +0200 Subject: Proposal for a reorganization of "info" documentation In-Reply-To: <1145276084.8213.117.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1145275329.12372.8.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> <1145276084.8213.117.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1145312135.29311.8.camel@scriabin.tannenrauch.ch> On Mon, 2006-04-17 at 14:14 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > Info files are designed and documented the way you describe, so all you > are doing is adding more overhead, incompatibility and confusion. Is it not confusing having categories "Programming", "Programming Tools", "Programming tools" and "Programming tools:"? You could also argue that changing or replacing .desktop files if there is already one is an overhead. Of course you could say, well, this is necessary, so that the entries appear at the right places in the Applications menu. But that's the point. As long as the info doc was only accessible via command line or Emacs, it did not matter much, but the documentation via yelp must be organized, so that can easily find what one looks for. This is currently not the case with info, it is a mess. If someone creates a special category, so be it, but if a generic category like the ones above, they should at least all written the same way. Regards, -- G?rard Milmeister Langackerstrasse 49 CH-8057 Z?rich From wart at kobold.org Mon Apr 17 22:53:36 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Michael Thomas) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:53:36 -0700 Subject: Your Fedora glows blue for a moment In-Reply-To: <20060417210037.f20456a2.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <44415936.3060600@kobold.org> <1145186548.349.22.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <20060417210037.f20456a2.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <44441C70.3020400@kobold.org> Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 16:52:28 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > >>On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 13:36 -0700, Wart wrote: >> >>>A group of game developers, packagers, and enthusiasts have >>>gathered together as the Games Special Interest Group (SIG) in >>>Fedora Extras. We have conspired to form a new mailing list >>>(http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-games-list) and >>>IRC channel (#fedora-games on irc.freenode.net). >>> >>>The SIG is involved in several activities related to the >>>promotion of Games in Fedora. We actively seek out new games, >>>game-related libraries, and game development tools to package. >>>We review each other package submissions to expedite the approval >>>process. We strive to document the games that we package so that >>>users can get an idea of what the game is like before they >>>install and play it. We discuss new packaging guidelines >>>specific to game packages. >>> >>>Of course, we also tend to play them a lot as well. :) >>> >>>Join us on #fedora-games or on fedora-games-list at redhat.com if >>>you'd like to help out the open-source gaming community. >> >>Great initiative. Rock on. > > > Seeing that what had started as only a spontaneous idea (with an > admittedly unimaginative name and acronym) even found its way into FUDCon > presentations, haha, interesting and entertaining. :) "GAMES" == "Gobs And Messloads of Entertaining Stuff" ? :) --Mike -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3820 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 17 23:20:47 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:20:47 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060417232047.53D7E8008@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 24 wine-docs-0.9.12-1.fc3 xfce4-battery-plugin-0.3.0-5.fc3 xfce4-clipman-plugin-0.4.1-5.fc3 xfce4-cpugraph-plugin-0.2.2-5.fc3 xfce4-datetime-plugin-0.3.1-6.fc3 xfce4-diskperf-plugin-1.5-5.fc3 xfce4-fsguard-plugin-0.2.1-3.fc3 xfce4-genmon-plugin-1.1-5.fc3 xfce4-minicmd-plugin-0.3.0-5.fc3 xfce4-modemlights-plugin-0.1.1-4.fc3 xfce4-mount-plugin-0.3.3-2.fc3 xfce4-netload-plugin-0.3.3-5.fc3 xfce4-notes-plugin-0.11.1-3.fc3 xfce4-quicklauncher-plugin-0.81-3.fc3 xfce4-screenshooter-plugin-0.0.8-2.fc3 xfce4-sensors-plugin-0.7.0-4.fc3 xfce4-showdesktop-plugin-0.4.0-5.fc3 xfce4-systemload-plugin-0.3.6-5.fc3 xfce4-taskbar-plugin-0.2.2-5.fc3 xfce4-wavelan-plugin-0.4.1-5.fc3 xfce4-weather-plugin-0.4.9-5.fc3 xfce4-websearch-plugin-0.1.0-5.fc3 xfce4-windowlist-plugin-0.1.0-5.fc3 xfce4-xkb-plugin-0.3.5-2.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 17 23:34:43 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:34:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060417233443.2865E8008@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 3 embryo-0.9.1.023-1.fc4 ularn-1.5p4-5.fc4 wine-docs-0.9.12-0.1.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 17 23:45:43 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:45:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060417234543.D105D8008@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 7 embryo-0.9.1.023-1.fc5 epiphany-extensions-2.14.0.1-1 gnomesword-2.1.5-3.fc5 ularn-1.5p4-5.fc5 wine-docs-0.9.12-1.fc5 wxGTK-2.6.3-2.6.3.2.1.fc5 wxPython-2.6.3.2-1.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 18 00:13:24 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 20:13:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060418001324.816258008@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 18 deskbar-applet-2.14.1.1-1.fc6 dogtail-0.5.1-3.fc6 embryo-0.9.1.023-1.fc6 epiphany-extensions-2.14.1-1 gobby-0.4.0-2.rc1.fc6 gparted-0.2.4-2.fc6 gphpedit-0.9.80-4.fc6 leafpad-0.8.9-1.fc6 net6-1.3.0-1.rc1.fc6 net6-1.3.0-2.rc1.fc6 obby-0.4.0-1.rc1.fc6 paps-0.6.5-1.fc6 perl-Module-Pluggable-2.97-1.fc6 pyspi-0.5.4-2.fc6 qtparted-0.4.5-5.fc6 ularn-1.5p4-5.fc6 wine-docs-0.9.12-1.fc6 wxGTK-2.6.3-2.6.3.2.1.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From jspaleta at gmail.com Tue Apr 18 00:15:56 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 20:15:56 -0400 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> <1145186731.349.25.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44427ED2.9080501@kobold.org> <1145225204.8213.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <44435C74.7010704@hhs.nl> <1145275833.8213.112.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <604aa7910604171417m7a2dcd3cl8fe895d05a382506@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910604171715l30af7df7gcaf9acad535029a9@mail.gmail.com> On 4/17/06, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > Would you really want to? Me? probably not... but I'm trying to make sure the context of the additional guidelines is put in the proper perspective for the vocal opponents and those reading along. I personally have no problem with special interest groups applying additional "shoulds" which are well reasoned when choosing to spend their volunteer time to do reviews as long as there is a clear good faith effort to work with the package submitter to quickly work through the additional suggestions. But the problem will come if the submitter doesn't agree with the additional requirements above and beyond the established general extras guidelines. I don't want reviews lingering in the FE-REVIEW state if non essential sig-only suggestions are the only outstanding issues which can't be agreed on. It should be made clear that in that case the game SIG members should put the review request back into the FE-NEW state so a non-sig member can then take the review assignment as time allows. I don't think this is likely, but in those oh-so-special cases when a submitter has a bee in the bonnet of a particular game sig "suggestions" I'd rather the game SIG members bow out of the review process quickly instead of waging a pitched battle in the review bugzilla. > But hey, if you don't agree with the reviewer, I suppose you can > always ask for another one. I'm sure you'll get one eventually. I garuntee you that at some point there will be honest disagreement between a submitter who finds the additional game specific "suggestions" burdensome, and I just want everyone to be clear as to the non-binding nature of the additional well-reasoned suggestions the game sig has. -jef From wart at kobold.org Tue Apr 18 00:26:00 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Michael Thomas) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:26:00 -0700 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <604aa7910604171715l30af7df7gcaf9acad535029a9@mail.gmail.com> References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> <1145186731.349.25.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44427ED2.9080501@kobold.org> <1145225204.8213.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <44435C74.7010704@hhs.nl> <1145275833.8213.112.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <604aa7910604171417m7a2dcd3cl8fe895d05a382506@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910604171715l30af7df7gcaf9acad535029a9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <44443218.5000201@kobold.org> Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 4/17/06, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>Would you really want to? > > > Me? probably not... but I'm trying to make sure the context of the > additional guidelines is put in the proper perspective for the vocal > opponents and those reading along. I personally have no problem with > special interest groups applying additional "shoulds" which are well > reasoned when choosing to spend their volunteer time to do reviews as > long as there is a clear good faith effort to work with the package > submitter to quickly work through the additional suggestions. > > But the problem will come if the submitter doesn't agree with the > additional requirements above and beyond the established general > extras guidelines. I don't want reviews lingering in the FE-REVIEW > state if non essential sig-only suggestions are the only outstanding > issues which can't be agreed on. It should be made clear that in that > case the game SIG members should put the review request back into the > FE-NEW state so a non-sig member can then take the review assignment > as time allows. I don't think this is likely, but in those > oh-so-special cases when a submitter has a bee in the bonnet of a > particular game sig "suggestions" I'd rather the game SIG members bow > out of the review process quickly instead of waging a pitched battle > in the review bugzilla. +1 If the SIG wants new guidelines to be hard requirements then we should go through the standard process of proposing changes to FESCo and defending the requirements on f-e-l. There should be one list of packaging requirements that all packages must follow, and the various SIGs can help contribute to that list based on common themes that they see in their related packages. --Mike >>But hey, if you don't agree with the reviewer, I suppose you can >>always ask for another one. I'm sure you'll get one eventually. > > > I garuntee you that at some point there will be honest disagreement > between a submitter who finds the additional game specific > "suggestions" burdensome, and I just want everyone to be clear as to > the non-binding nature of the additional well-reasoned suggestions the > game sig has. > > -jef > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3820 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 01:06:20 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 21:06:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604180106.k3I16KIG017337@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From lyz27 at yahoo.com 2006-04-17 21:05 EST ------- The boo spec needed to be modified to use the -root option for gacutil. for lib in bin/Boo.Lang.dll bin/Boo.Lang.Useful.dll bin/Boo.Lang.Compiler.dll bin/Boo.Lang.Parser.dll bin/Boo.Lang.Interpreter.dll bin/Boo.Lang.CodeDom.dll bin/pt/Boo.Lang.resources.dll; do gacutil -i ${lib} -f -package boo -root ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_libdir}; done Unfortunatly.. It still doesn't work as [root at localhost /]# cat `which booc` #!/bin/sh env /usr/bin/mono /usr/lib/boo/booc.exe "$@" doesn't work as the exe is under /usr/lib64/boo not /usr/lib -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From rc040203 at freenet.de Tue Apr 18 01:30:12 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 03:30:12 +0200 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> <1145186731.349.25.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44427ED2.9080501@kobold.org> <1145225204.8213.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <44435C74.7010704@hhs.nl> <1145275833.8213.112.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1145323812.8213.218.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Mon, 2006-04-17 at 14:36 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>> "RC" == Ralf Corsepius writes: > > RC> The point is: This requirement is legal non-sense and probably > RC> void. > > Why on earth would this have anything to do with legality? 1. A packager adding a license file, can be read as "granting a license"/"relicensing" To be able to so, he'd either have to be the copyright owner or having been granted a license to so. The former will rarely apply. In the latter case, he must have obtained this license from some other place (the license's master) inside of the package, i.e. from other sources of information already present inside of the package. => This "detaching a license" is redundant. 2. Using "detached license" files is questionable in general. There are voices from people with strong US-legal background (e.g. FSF legal), who say: "Only inlined licenses are safe". It's the reason why all FSF-owned files care a short copyright/license notice at their beginning. => "A detached license file" is not unlikely legally irrelevant. I.e. the basic question would be: What is the legal relevance of a packager adding a "LICENSE" file and what does it cover? A purely informative file ("README.licenses"), trying to summarize all the licenses contained in a package ("This package contains files covered by the following licenses: ...") is a different matter. But I fail to see the need why such a file should be made mandatory. > The > requirement is there for clarity; games often have custom licenses > that aren't easily summarized in the 20 characters that the RPM > License: tag gives us. I'd simply use "License: Distributable". It's what many other packages in similar situations do. > People need to be able to see the license for > the game files summarized as documentation instead of plowing through > the source code. I don't see why people would want to need this. If a package is part of FE, it is supposed to be OSI compliant. Packagers and package review are supposed to take care of this. If developers want to use files from a package, they will have to look into each files' license, anyway. Here, I don't see that a game's licensing is any different from any other arbitrary package. Any non-trivial package with a sensible history/record is in a similar situation. > The only context in which the requirement would be void would be that > of Fedora Extras, and then only if the steering committee declared > that the Games SIG can't place that additional restriction. Which > they haven't. So just what are you objecting to? I am objecting to force packagers to write and add license files, because 1. these files put packagers at avoidable, unnecessary, additional legal risks. 2. these files are of very doubtful benefits. and 3. implementing them means additional work. Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 01:28:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 21:28:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188105] Review Request: torque In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604180128.k3I1SqWM024443@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|fedora-extras- |fedora-package- |list at redhat.com |review at redhat.com ed at eh3.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|fedora-package- |fedora-extras- |review at redhat.com |list at redhat.com OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-04-17 21:28 EST ------- The SRPM [please note the "6" instead of "5" in release tag since the SRPM URL in comment #14 has a typo] at: http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~garrick/torque-2.1.0p0-0.6.200604171430cvs.src.rpm sha1sum: ba0a569763d6b91697c9a40723b392be464ab64e does cleanup everything mentioned in comments #12--13 and heres the remainder of the review: very minor nit: + please consider adding the "-q" option to %setup so that the build logs are a little shorter and more readable (just a request--by no means a blocker!) good: OK - source matches upstream OK - macro usage looks consistent although there are some harmless quirks like having both %__rm and %{__rm} OK - proper use of -devel OK - desktop files appear to have correct install syntax OK - scriptlets look sane to me OK - installed and runs with out seg-faulting on a single FC4 i386 machine (I do need to go dig up the syntax for creating default queues, etc. because a quick "qsub -I" seems to wait forever and I imagine its an incomplete setup and thus my fault. Other commands such as "pbsnodes -a" and "qmgr" work just fine--no segfaults.) I don't see any blockers so its APPROVED. Congrats on the first package and please feel free to contact me if you want any help with FE CVS, the build system, etc. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 01:29:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 21:29:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177841] Tracker: New Extras packages that need a sponsor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604180129.k3I1TUOM024645@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Tracker: New Extras packages that need a sponsor Alias: FE-NEEDSPONSOR https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 01:37:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 21:37:08 -0400 Subject: [Bug 188105] Review Request: torque In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604180137.k3I1b8tX027416@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: torque https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188105 ed at eh3.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|fedora-extras- |fedora-package- |list at redhat.com |review at redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 18 07:21:50 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 09:21:50 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060417201503.GF32157@devserv.devel.redhat.com> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414135622.GG4650@free.fr> <20060417153741.GB18516@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20060417201503.GF32157@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060418092150.a57a0d13.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:15:03 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Jason L Tibbitts III (tibbs at math.uh.edu) said: > > >>>>> "BN" == Bill Nottingham writes: > > > > BN> With Extras... it's 'maybe, depending on the package'. Do you > > BN> really expect someone to look at a web page that has maintenance > > BN> status for 3000 packages? > > > > The only thing I really care about is that I not be prevented from or > > overly encumbered in updating the packages I maintain for older Fedora > > releases. > > > > So if I just have to introduce myself to the extras-legacy team and > > say "I'll be maintaining denyhosts for FC-3" and don't have to go > > through additional process then I'm perfectly happy. But if I have to > > go through additional review or learn a different build system then > > I'm not sure it would be worth the trouble. > > The idea is to get Legacy building through the same sort of system > as Extras... it's just not there yet. This is a confusing comment and indicates that afterall we may need to come up with a different name. Fedora _Extras_ Legacy will be part of Fedora Extras. Same CVS server, same buildsystem, same repository. Slightly modified policies are only needed to make sure that a special group of people is permitted to apply legacy maintenance where the primary package owners decline. This is alongside the policies for a Fedora Extras Security Team. From koed at inMail.sk Tue Apr 18 09:40:19 2006 From: koed at inMail.sk (eduard kotrus) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 09:40:19 Subject: unscribe Message-ID: <200604180940101.SM05464@localhost> unscribe koed at inmail.sk ---------- www.icewarp.cz - Merak Mail Server Zabezpeceny mail server pre Windows a Linux s Groupware. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 18 07:52:53 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 09:52:53 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060417220528.GB25203@free.fr> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414135622.GG4650@free.fr> <20060417153741.GB18516@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20060417213901.GA25203@free.fr> <20060417214518.GA23349@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20060417220528.GB25203@free.fr> Message-ID: <20060418095253.21c4db4c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 00:05:28 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > The users > should trust the packager (and the fedora extras community) for doing the > right kind of maintainance. Trust will become mistrust with every bugzilla ticket where a package maintainer doesn't respond, with every security vulnerability which a user believes is not fixed soon enough, with every package version that is seen as too old compared with upstream releases, with every package that is assigned to extras-orphan in bugzilla, [...] It is admirable if we _hope_ for everything to work flawlessly. It is [an old] vision that every package (well, at least every popular one) is taken care of by multiple maintainers, who not only add redundancy but team-work, which is necessary in times of vacation and increased resource/time/maintenance requirements. We already face "fire'n'forget packages", which somebody manages to push through the review process and into the repository, but who then hides until it is discovered that the packages have not been touched for months and that their maintainer doesn't seem to be reachable. We need policies which document our goals and our procedures. To create an environment which makes it easier and more convenient for contributors to help where help is [or seems to be] needed. To avoid that the road of "contact the maintainer" becomes a dead end with a sign which reads "so the maintainer doesn't respond -- what now?". To document what we try to achieve. Policies and procedures which make it possible to verify and measure whether we do achieve what we try to achieve. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 18 08:01:19 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 08:01:19 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-18 Message-ID: <20060418080119.4982.89368@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: pyxdg From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 18 08:01:29 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 08:01:29 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-18 Message-ID: <20060418080129.4986.27786@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 18 08:01:38 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 08:01:38 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-18 Message-ID: <20060418080138.4989.44071@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 18 08:01:50 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 08:01:50 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-18 Message-ID: <20060418080150.4993.11903@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 Macaulay2-doc 0.9.2-22.fc6.i386 Macaulay2-emacs 0.9.2-17.fc4.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 smart 0.41-30.fc6.i386 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc Macaulay2-doc 0.9.2-22.fc6.ppc Macaulay2-emacs 0.9.2-17.fc4.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc smart 0.41-30.fc6.ppc sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 smart 0.41-30.fc6.x86_64 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libobby-0.3.so.0 libnet6-1.2.so.0 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: Macaulay2-emacs - 0.9.2-17.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: Macaulay2-doc - 0.9.2-22.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libobby-0.3.so.0()(64bit) package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0()(64bit) libglade gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: Macaulay2-emacs - 0.9.2-17.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libobby-0.3.so.0 libnet6-1.2.so.0 package: Macaulay2-doc - 0.9.2-22.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 From petr.fischer at praguesoft.cz Tue Apr 18 08:04:27 2006 From: petr.fischer at praguesoft.cz (Petr Fischer) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 10:04:27 +0200 Subject: xfsprogs - where is xfsdump/xfsrestore? Message-ID: <1145347467.3366.33.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hi, is there a different package with xfsdump/xfsrestore for Fedora Core 5? Thanks, pf From chitlesh at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 18 09:00:42 2006 From: chitlesh at fedoraproject.org (Chitlesh GOORAH) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:00:42 +0200 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-18 In-Reply-To: <20060418080138.4989.44071@faldor.intranet> References: <20060418080138.4989.44071@faldor.intranet> Message-ID: <13dbfe4f0604180200l58bf52ddu829d96f88351b678@mail.gmail.com> I have this dependency with evolution, today : Missing Dependency: libpisock.so.8 is needed by package evolution On 4/18/06, Michael Schwendt wrote: > Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 > > Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc > > Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 > > > ====================================================================== > package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 > unresolved deps: > libssl.so.5 > libcrypto.so.5 > > package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 > unresolved deps: > libssl.so.5()(64bit) > libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) > > package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc > unresolved deps: > libssl.so.5 > libcrypto.so.5 > > -- > fedora-extras-list mailing list > fedora-extras-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list > -- http://clunixchit.blogspot.com From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 18 09:06:55 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:06:55 +0200 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-18 In-Reply-To: <13dbfe4f0604180200l58bf52ddu829d96f88351b678@mail.gmail.com> References: <20060418080138.4989.44071@faldor.intranet> <13dbfe4f0604180200l58bf52ddu829d96f88351b678@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060418110655.72c9748f.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:00:42 +0200, Chitlesh GOORAH wrote: > I have this dependency with evolution, today : > Missing Dependency: libpisock.so.8 is needed by package evolution For Fedora Core Development (aka Rawhide) there is a separate report. Broken dependencies, which don't affect Fedora Extras _directly_, are filtered out in my report. From chitlesh at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 18 09:08:53 2006 From: chitlesh at fedoraproject.org (Chitlesh GOORAH) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:08:53 +0200 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-18 In-Reply-To: <20060418110655.72c9748f.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060418080138.4989.44071@faldor.intranet> <13dbfe4f0604180200l58bf52ddu829d96f88351b678@mail.gmail.com> <20060418110655.72c9748f.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <13dbfe4f0604180208s84dbfcdgbe7d9d48b97a5eea@mail.gmail.com> > For Fedora Core Development (aka Rawhide) there is a separate report. > Broken dependencies, which don't affect Fedora Extras _directly_, > are filtered out in my report. I have only core,extras and updates repos enabled. -- http://clunixchit.blogspot.com From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Apr 18 09:09:13 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 10:09:13 +0100 Subject: Altering %{_libdir} Message-ID: <1145351353.2641.15.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, One of the problems of packaging for mono is that it expects libs et al to be in /usr/lib and not /usr/lib64. This causes lots of problems. Is there a way to say in the spec something akin to if %{_libdir} != '/usr/lib' ${_libdir} = '/usr/lib'; Whenever I've tried to use --libdir inside of the CXX definition, something gets confused and the software refuses to build. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 09:25:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 05:25:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 167974] Review Request: hugs98 - Haskell Interpreter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604180925.k3I9PSf1023344@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hugs98 - Haskell Interpreter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167974 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From petersen at redhat.com 2006-04-18 05:25 EST ------- Apologies for "sitting" on this for too long. 0) Upstream are now using YYYY-MM to label download dirs at least, so I wonder if it is better to use 2005.03 say for the version. (eg Gentoo is using 2005.3) 1) rpmlint complains: W: hugs98 invalid-license BSDish, see License file, GPL, LGPL I think just calling it BSD would be sufficient. 2) There seems to a small build problem on fc5: : Compiling FFI stubs ../../../src/ffihugs -98 -P../../../hugsdir/packages/OpenAL: -i"HsOpenAL.h" ../../../hugsdir/packages/OpenAL/Sound/OpenAL/AL/Buffer.hs -Iinclude -DCALLCONV=ccall -lopenal runhugs: Error occurred ERROR "../../../hugsdir/packages/OpenAL/Sound/OpenAL/AL/BasicTypes.hs":70 - Undefined type constructor "HTYPE_ALCLAMPD" Skipping OpenAL package : but probably openal support is not that important and could be skipped for now on fc5. 3) Probably the description should be made more concise. 4) md5sum is good 5) buildrequires need to be updated for modular X: I attach a diff below. 6) builds fine with mock on fc4 and fc5 x86_64 7) Perhaps it is a good idea to configure --with-pthreads? 8) if demos/ (2.3MB) is to be included, it must be subpackaged into a separate subpackage (say hugs98-demos). Otherwise looks good to me. I think if at least 0, 1, 5, and 8 are addressed this package can be accepted. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 09:32:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 05:32:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175198] Review Request: perl-Math-Pari In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604180932.k3I9Wx5a026547@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Math-Pari https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175198 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-04-18 05:32 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > NeedsWork: > * the files libPARI.dumb.pod, Math::libPARI.dumb.3pm.gz are duplicates > of libPARI.pod, Math::libPARI.3pm.gz (ok, they have slightly different > formats) > (Easy fix - just remove the *dumb* files) Fixed in -2: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Math-Pari/perl-Math-Pari.spec http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Math-Pari/perl-Math-Pari-2.010704-2.fc5.src.rpm > Other minor notes: > * Would be nice to have Term::Gnuplot around to improve the test coverage Added to To-Do list. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 18 10:04:35 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 12:04:35 +0200 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-18 In-Reply-To: <13dbfe4f0604180208s84dbfcdgbe7d9d48b97a5eea@mail.gmail.com> References: <20060418080138.4989.44071@faldor.intranet> <13dbfe4f0604180200l58bf52ddu829d96f88351b678@mail.gmail.com> <20060418110655.72c9748f.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <13dbfe4f0604180208s84dbfcdgbe7d9d48b97a5eea@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060418120435.aaf0e19c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:08:53 +0200, Chitlesh GOORAH wrote: > > For Fedora Core Development (aka Rawhide) there is a separate report. > > Broken dependencies, which don't affect Fedora Extras _directly_, > > are filtered out in my report. > > I have only core,extras and updates repos enabled. Well, evolution and libpisock (pilot-link) are Core packages, not Extras, so this is still the wrong mailing-list. For Fedora Core 5, this would be found (and interestingly, in FC5 is libpisock.so.9): source rpm: evolution-2.6.1-1.fc5.2.src.rpm package: evolution - 2.6.1-1.fc5.2.i386 from fedora-core-updates-5-i386 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.8 source rpm: evolution-2.6.1-1.fc5.2.src.rpm package: evolution - 2.6.1-1.fc5.2.x86_64 from fedora-core-updates-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.8()(64bit) source rpm: evolution-2.6.1-1.fc5.2.src.rpm package: evolution - 2.6.1-1.fc5.2.ppc from fedora-core-updates-5-ppc unresolved deps: libpisock.so.8 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 18 10:10:20 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 12:10:20 +0200 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-18 In-Reply-To: <20060418120435.aaf0e19c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060418080138.4989.44071@faldor.intranet> <13dbfe4f0604180200l58bf52ddu829d96f88351b678@mail.gmail.com> <20060418110655.72c9748f.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <13dbfe4f0604180208s84dbfcdgbe7d9d48b97a5eea@mail.gmail.com> <20060418120435.aaf0e19c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060418121020.8d1f157d.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 12:04:35 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > For Fedora Core 5, this would be found (and interestingly, in FC5 is > libpisock.so.9): Erhm, FC4 libpisock.so.9, so .8 is an ABI downgrade. > source rpm: evolution-2.6.1-1.fc5.2.src.rpm > package: evolution - 2.6.1-1.fc5.2.i386 from fedora-core-updates-5-i386 > unresolved deps: > libpisock.so.8 > > source rpm: evolution-2.6.1-1.fc5.2.src.rpm > package: evolution - 2.6.1-1.fc5.2.x86_64 from fedora-core-updates-5-x86_64 > unresolved deps: > libpisock.so.8()(64bit) > > source rpm: evolution-2.6.1-1.fc5.2.src.rpm > package: evolution - 2.6.1-1.fc5.2.ppc from fedora-core-updates-5-ppc > unresolved deps: > libpisock.so.8 > From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 18 10:11:56 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 12:11:56 +0200 Subject: Altering %{_libdir} In-Reply-To: <1145351353.2641.15.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1145351353.2641.15.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <20060418121156.14776428.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 10:09:13 +0100, PFJ wrote: > Hi, > > One of the problems of packaging for mono is that it expects libs et al > to be in /usr/lib and not /usr/lib64. This causes lots of problems. > > Is there a way to say in the spec something akin to > > if %{_libdir} != '/usr/lib' > ${_libdir} = '/usr/lib'; > > Whenever I've tried to use --libdir inside of the CXX definition, > something gets confused and the software refuses to build. %define _libdir %{_prefix}/lib would override the default %{_libdir}. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Tue Apr 18 11:17:45 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 13:17:45 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060418095253.21c4db4c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414135622.GG4650@free.fr> <20060417153741.GB18516@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20060417213901.GA25203@free.fr> <20060417214518.GA23349@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20060417220528.GB25203@free.fr> <20060418095253.21c4db4c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <4444CAD9.7090102@hhs.nl> Michael Schwendt wrote: > We already face "fire'n'forget packages", which somebody manages to push > through the review process and into the repository, but who then hides > until it is discovered that the packages have not been touched for months > and that their maintainer doesn't seem to be reachable. > I fully agree that this is a big problem. I like the term "fire'n'forget packages" it covers the charge, I'm worried however about all the policies people are trying to create to fight symptoms of this problem. Wouldn't it be better to just have a sane auto orphan policy for these and then a sane orphan policy on top? Regards, Hans From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Tue Apr 18 11:22:23 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 13:22:23 +0200 Subject: Contribution to Extras (an update) In-Reply-To: <1145323812.8213.218.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <20060414225953.81783.qmail@web32605.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1145057052.349.7.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44404812.5070408@knox.net.nz> <1145186731.349.25.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> <44427ED2.9080501@kobold.org> <1145225204.8213.100.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <44435C74.7010704@hhs.nl> <1145275833.8213.112.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145323812.8213.218.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <4444CBEF.9000806@hhs.nl> Ralf Corsepius wrote: > I am objecting to force packagers to write and add license files, > because > 1. these files put packagers at avoidable, unnecessary, additional legal > risks. > 2. these files are of very doubtful benefits. > and > 3. implementing them means additional work. > I think this is a misunderstanding of what the Games SIG policy intends, the intend of the Games SIG policy is not to let the packager write a License, but to always have a written license with the package, this written license should ofcourse come from upstream. Say for example that their is a license on upstreams download page but not in the sources, then we want the license from the download page in the package. One of the reasons for this is it makes reviewing easier (yes this means that we trust the submitter to not add a false license file). Regards, Hans From pmatilai at laiskiainen.org Tue Apr 18 11:42:30 2006 From: pmatilai at laiskiainen.org (Panu Matilainen) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 04:42:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Altering %{_libdir} In-Reply-To: <20060418121156.14776428.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1145351353.2641.15.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <20060418121156.14776428.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 10:09:13 +0100, PFJ wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> One of the problems of packaging for mono is that it expects libs et al >> to be in /usr/lib and not /usr/lib64. This causes lots of problems. >> >> Is there a way to say in the spec something akin to >> >> if %{_libdir} != '/usr/lib' >> ${_libdir} = '/usr/lib'; >> >> Whenever I've tried to use --libdir inside of the CXX definition, >> something gets confused and the software refuses to build. > > %define _libdir %{_prefix}/lib > > would override the default %{_libdir}. If the software uses hardcoded /usr/lib for its paths there's not much point in using %{_libdir} to begin with. - Panu - From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Apr 18 11:47:46 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 12:47:46 +0100 Subject: Altering %{_libdir} In-Reply-To: References: <1145351353.2641.15.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <20060418121156.14776428.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1145360866.2641.60.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, > > %define _libdir %{_prefix}/lib > > > > would override the default %{_libdir}. > > If the software uses hardcoded /usr/lib for its paths there's not much > point in using %{_libdir} to begin with. That is true. However, the mono packages require everything to be in /usr/lib, so adding the _libdir line does no harm is you're on i386. I don't have access to a PPC so can't comment on it. For the time being, it's worked quite nicely and I should have updates, read and eager for someone to approve them/poke them with a pointy stick and allow/not allow into FE. There has just been a posting on the mono-dev list regarding FC and the lack of mono packages, so it is something folks want! TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 18 11:58:49 2006 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 17:28:49 +0530 Subject: unscribe In-Reply-To: <200604180940101.SM05464@localhost> References: <200604180940101.SM05464@localhost> Message-ID: <1145361529.349.115.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 09:40 +0000, eduard kotrus wrote: > unscribe koed at inmail.sk Instructions to unsubsribe from this list are available at http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list. Rahul From pertusus at free.fr Tue Apr 18 12:12:31 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:12:31 +0200 Subject: RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy In-Reply-To: <20060418095253.21c4db4c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060414121221.9cec5d64.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414111102.GC4650@free.fr> <20060414153441.bfb1a176.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060414135622.GG4650@free.fr> <20060417153741.GB18516@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20060417213901.GA25203@free.fr> <20060417214518.GA23349@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20060417220528.GB25203@free.fr> <20060418095253.21c4db4c.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060418121231.GB2424@free.fr> On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 09:52:53AM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 00:05:28 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > > The users > > should trust the packager (and the fedora extras community) for doing the > > right kind of maintainance. > > Trust will become mistrust with every bugzilla ticket where a package > maintainer doesn't respond, with every security vulnerability which a user > believes is not fixed soon enough, with every package version that is seen > as too old compared with upstream releases, with every package that is > assigned to extras-orphan in bugzilla, [...] I completly agree. But this these are not issues for fedora extras for eol fedora core versions. It is an issue for fedora extras as a whole. And my point is that the response for these issues is not to have a well defined maintainance policy for fedora extras legacy, similar with what is done for fedora core legacy (no new package, only security fixes, or even a review for every update and an approval for pending updates), but to tackle the issues for fedora extras as a whole. > We need policies which document our goals and our procedures. To create an > environment which makes it easier and more convenient for contributors to > help where help is [or seems to be] needed. To avoid that the road of > "contact the maintainer" becomes a dead end with a sign which reads "so > the maintainer doesn't respond -- what now?". To document what we try to > achieve. Policies and procedures which make it possible to verify and > measure whether we do achieve what we try to achieve. I started a thread on those subjects, to avoid having these issues mixed with the fedora for eol fedora core versions issues. So far nobody seems to be interested :-(. -- Pat From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 13:21:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 09:21:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176374] Review Request: nagios-plugins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604181321.k3IDLhxO005070@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nagios-plugins https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176374 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com webmaster at margo.bijoux.nom.br changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |webmaster at margo.bijoux.nom.b | |r ------- Additional Comments From webmaster at margo.bijoux.nom.br 2006-04-18 09:21 EST ------- In the latest srpm posted here, nagios-plugins-all requires nagios-plugins-httpd , but the plugin package is nagios-plugins-http. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Tue Apr 18 13:52:12 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:52:12 +0200 Subject: FE Package Status of Apr 18, 2006 Message-ID: <200604181352.k3IDqCBK019806@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Hi folks, PackageStatus page has been updated. I have a few comments: - I don't quite understand what's the deal with the "smart" package. We seem to have an approved version built, but there still is another open review ticket, apparently for the same package: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175438 Could maybe Enrico comment on this ? - the owners.list file is not well sorted. I tried: LC_ALL=POSIX sort -f -t '|' +1 -2 owners.list |diff -u owners.list and there are quite a few offending lines. Do we all agree that the file should be sorted according to POSIX rule, case folded ? (beware of heading comments... some'll be shuffled around with the above sort command) - I have put more detailed instructions how to use my script in the header comment within the script and updated the Extras/UsefulScripts page. Patrice, I haven't included your patch yet, but I intend to. - I still think it would be nice to have a CVS repo for all the QA scripts, so that all interested people can easily improve them. I could set one up on SourceForge, but I guess it'd be a bit strange.... ;-) Cheers, Christian --- FE Package Status of Apr 18, 2006 The full report can be found here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/PackageStatus Owners file stats: - 1607 packages - 60 orphans - 42 packages not available in extras devel or release Axel dot Thimm at ATrpms dot net synaptic andreas at bawue dot net dd_rescue cgoorah at yahoo dot com dot au kadischi davidhart at tqmcube dot com leafnode dennis at ausil dot us cryptplug dreadyman at gmail dot com yakuake fredrik at dolda2000 dot com icmpdn garrick at usc dot edu torque gauret at free dot fr elmo gemi at bluewin dot ch inti gemi at bluewin dot ch drscheme ghenry at suretecsystems dot com gnome-applet-netmon ghenry at suretecsystems dot com rsnapshot ivazquez at ivazquez dot net gnome-theme-clearlooks ivazquez at ivazquez dot net gpredict jvdias at redhat dot com webmin matthias at rpmforge dot net php-pecl-sqlite matthias at rpmforge dot net fillets-ng-data-cs matthias at rpmforge dot net php-mmcache notting at redhat dot com perl-Finanace-Quote notting at redhat dot com comps oliver at linux-kernel dot at squidGuard sgrubb at redhat dot com libsafe steve at silug dot org perl-IPC-Cmd steve at silug dot org perl-Archive-Extract tcallawa at redhat dot com R-RScaLAPACK tcallawa at redhat dot com libgdamm tcallawa at redhat dot com R-hdf5 tcallawa at redhat dot com stripesnoop tcallawa at redhat dot com compat-wxPythonGTK2 tcallawa at redhat dot com lout tcallawa at redhat dot com pam_pkcs11 tcallawa at redhat dot com opendap tkmame at retrogames dot com SOAPpy toniw at iki dot fi silky toniw at iki dot fi libmatchbox ville dot skytta at iki dot fi lirc-kmod-common ville dot skytta at iki dot fi lirc-kmod wtogami at redhat dot com openoffice-extras wtogami at redhat dot com iiimf-le-simplehangul zipsonic at gmail dot com nx zipsonic at gmail dot com freenx - 1 packages not available in extras devel but present in release Axel dot Thimm at ATrpms dot net fedora-package-config-smart - 4 packages which have not yet been FE-APPROVE'd... https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_id=165689,175438,184080,187186 SquidGuard oliver at linux-kernel.at smart enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de webmin jvdias at redhat.com up-imapproxy drees76 at gmail.com - 3 packages present in the development repo which have no owners entry bcm43xx-fwcutter perl-Finance-Quote wxPythonGTK2 - 15 orphaned packages, yet available in extras devel duplicity gtkglarea2 ks3switch lrmi lua ots perl-Chart perl-Net-Netmask perl-XML-DOM perl-XML-RegExp perl-XML-XPath perl-XML-XQL s3switch tpb xosd - 36 packages that moved to core Packages appearing both in Core and Extras: - 1 packages duplicated for FC5: tcallawa at redhat dot com check - 1 packages duplicated for devel: tcallawa at redhat dot com check FE-ACCEPT packages stats: - 674 accepted, closed package reviews - 4 accepted, closed package reviews not in repo - 3 accepted, closed package reviews not in owners - 4 accepted, open package reviews older than 4 weeks; - 16 accepted, open package reviews with a package already in the repo FE-REVIEW packages stats: - 80 open tickets - 17 tickets with no activity in eight weeks - 18 tickets with no activity in four weeks - 2 closed tickets FE-NEW packages stats: - 167 open tickets - 28 tickets with no activity in eight weeks - 28 tickets with no activity in four weeks - 7 closed tickets FE-NEEDSPONSOR packages stats: - 32 open tickets - 16 tickets with no activity in eight weeks - 5 tickets with no activity in four weeks FE-LEGAL packages stats: - 1 open tickets OPEN-BUGS packages stats: - 202 open tickets - 68 tickets with no activity in eight weeks - 71 tickets with no activity in four weeks CVS stats: - 1584 packages with a devel directory - 8 packages with no owners entry bcm43xx-fwcutter git-core initng kile-i18n paraview perl-Finance-Quote perl-Gtk2-Spell perl-Maypole - 2 packages in CVS devel *and* Core check libevent Maintainers stats: - 176 maintainers - 2 inactive maintainers with open bugs From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 13:47:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 09:47:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604181347.k3IDlEpH016018@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-18 09:46 EST ------- Yep - this is down to mono wanting *everything* to be in /usr/lib rather than say /usr/lib64 (and adding --libdir=/usr/lib64 doesn't help either). I have a fix which I'll apply to all of the packages so that they all build to /usr/lib instead of /usr/lib64 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Apr 18 14:12:21 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:12:21 +0100 Subject: .pc files Message-ID: <1145369542.2641.66.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, I have a couple of packages where rpmlint is throwing a warning a devel package is required for a .pc file. I can create the -devel rpm happily, but it seems a bit pointless as it will only contain the .pc file itself. Also it is not happy with mono binaries being /usr/lib (which is where the installer puts them with symlinks to /usr/bin). Can I just ignore that error? TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 14:23:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 10:23:04 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176374] Review Request: nagios-plugins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604181423.k3IEN4UL029718@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nagios-plugins https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176374 ------- Additional Comments From imlinux at gmail.com 2006-04-18 10:22 EST ------- SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-plugins-1.4.2-9.20060216cvs.src.rpm SPEC: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-plugins.spec Oops, fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From rdieter at math.unl.edu Tue Apr 18 14:48:19 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 09:48:19 -0500 Subject: .pc files In-Reply-To: <1145369542.2641.66.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1145369542.2641.66.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: PFJ wrote: > I have a couple of packages where rpmlint is throwing a warning a devel > package is required for a .pc file. I can create the -devel rpm happily, > but it seems a bit pointless as it will only contain the .pc file > itself. Just a generally good guideline to follow, but in your case, it's not worth a subpkg for a single .pc file. Since it is a pkgconfig file, consider adding the dependancy: Requires: pkgconfig > Also it is not happy with mono binaries being /usr/lib (which is where > the installer puts them with symlinks to /usr/bin). Can I just ignore > that error? Another generally useful guideline that can be ignored in specific cases. -- Rex From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 18:17:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:17:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175198] Review Request: perl-Math-Pari In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604181817.k3IIHnUb015193@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Math-Pari https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175198 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2006-04-18 14:17 EST ------- APPROVED MD5SUMS: 6b44f5a3e572896883e83cff57581fe6 perl-Math-Pari-2.010704-2.fc5.src.rpm 0397da31fbe4f5485c4e7094c3661c5a Math-Pari-2.010704.tar.gz 357b7a42e89e2761a5367bbcbfcca5f2 pari-2.1.7.tgz e912c8aefcc2c2aaae4daaf62441545d perl-Math-Pari.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From vic_sk at yahoo.com Tue Apr 18 19:06:51 2006 From: vic_sk at yahoo.com (Victor Skovorodnikov) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 12:06:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: A licensing question In-Reply-To: <604aa7910604171422o32391289ld69571e1fc2443ad@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060418190651.75627.qmail@web32610.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Jeff Spaleta wrote:"non-commercial" is unacceptable. -jef -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list Hi Jeff, Would you please elaborate on as to why it is unacceptable? I though Fedora is, by definitiion, non-commercial. Much appreciate it, Victor. --------------------------------- Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 19:18:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:18:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 167974] Review Request: hugs98 - Haskell Interpreter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604181918.k3IJIOoV006945@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hugs98 - Haskell Interpreter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167974 ------- Additional Comments From gemi at bluewin.ch 2006-04-18 15:18 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > Apologies for "sitting" on this for too long. Better late than never :-) > 0) > Upstream are now using YYYY-MM to label download dirs at least, > so I wonder if it is better to use 2005.03 say for the version. > (eg Gentoo is using 2005.3) Ok > 1) rpmlint complains: > W: hugs98 invalid-license BSDish, see License file, GPL, LGPL > I think just calling it BSD would be sufficient. Ok > 2) There seems to a small build problem on fc5: > Skipping OpenAL package There are quite some incompatibilities between openal 0.0.9 and previous versions. > 3) Probably the description should be made more concise. Is the first paragraph enough? > 5) buildrequires need to be updated for modular X: I attach a diff below. Ok > 8) if demos/ (2.3MB) is to be included, it must be subpackaged into > a separate subpackage (say hugs98-demos). Ok, but I still install them into /usr/lib/hugs. One could also subpackage the packages like opengl etc... I prefer not to, but if you think it is better... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 18 20:37:22 2006 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 02:07:22 +0530 Subject: A licensing question In-Reply-To: <20060418190651.75627.qmail@web32610.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060418190651.75627.qmail@web32610.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1145392642.349.153.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 12:06 -0700, Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > Jeff Spaleta wrote: > "non-commercial" is unacceptable. > > -jef > > -- > fedora-extras-list mailing list > fedora-extras-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list > > Hi Jeff, > > Would you please elaborate on as to why it is unacceptable? I though > Fedora is, by definitiion, non-commercial. Open source by definition mandates the ability to distribute code commercially http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-8be956fd12dbe4ae927e65c989e7e83b9fcc0b80 Rahul From jspaleta at gmail.com Tue Apr 18 20:40:42 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:40:42 -0400 Subject: A licensing question In-Reply-To: <20060418190651.75627.qmail@web32610.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <604aa7910604171422o32391289ld69571e1fc2443ad@mail.gmail.com> <20060418190651.75627.qmail@web32610.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910604181340r265499ey1db77df802156c76@mail.gmail.com> On 4/18/06, Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > Would you please elaborate on as to why it is unacceptable? I though > Fedora is, by definitiion, non-commercial. While the Fedora project itself does not monetarily profit from the codebase, the project endeavors to protect the right/freedom of other people to use the sourcecode base as the basis for a commercial endeavor. For example its perfectly acceptable for 3rd party vendors to commercially sell mediasets(with the appropriate warranty) of the fedora core and extras repositories. By including some packages which can not be included in such mediasets, you have greatly complicated vendor involvement. I suggest you become more familiar with the OSI definition of "open source" as a general guiding principle as to what licensing terms are acceptable. http://opensource.org/docs/definition.html Non-commercial clauses fail OSI's "No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor" principle and thus unacceptable. -jef From vic_sk at yahoo.com Tue Apr 18 21:04:04 2006 From: vic_sk at yahoo.com (Victor Skovorodnikov) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:04:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: A licensing question In-Reply-To: <604aa7910604181340r265499ey1db77df802156c76@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060418210404.87178.qmail@web32607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi Jef, Thank you for clarifying. I think that the link you've provided refers to source code. The source code is mine and I am perfectly willing to provide whatever (commercial included) license you require. But, do images also fall into the "Open Source" category? While there is a lot of explanation of what "Open Source" is, it talks about source code I think, not images. Can the images be licensed for non-commercial purposes while the source code can be for commercial as that article indicates? After all, it is the code that would form the basis of my package, not the images Thanks, Victor. Jeff Spaleta wrote: On 4/18/06, Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > Would you please elaborate on as to why it is unacceptable? I though > Fedora is, by definitiion, non-commercial. While the Fedora project itself does not monetarily profit from the codebase, the project endeavors to protect the right/freedom of other people to use the sourcecode base as the basis for a commercial endeavor. For example its perfectly acceptable for 3rd party vendors to commercially sell mediasets(with the appropriate warranty) of the fedora core and extras repositories. By including some packages which can not be included in such mediasets, you have greatly complicated vendor involvement. I suggest you become more familiar with the OSI definition of "open source" as a general guiding principle as to what licensing terms are acceptable. http://opensource.org/docs/definition.html Non-commercial clauses fail OSI's "No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor" principle and thus unacceptable. -jef -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From smooge at gmail.com Tue Apr 18 21:21:21 2006 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:21:21 -0600 Subject: A licensing question In-Reply-To: <20060418210404.87178.qmail@web32607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <604aa7910604181340r265499ey1db77df802156c76@mail.gmail.com> <20060418210404.87178.qmail@web32607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <80d7e4090604181421j1a4ffb0dk554386156dc6972f@mail.gmail.com> On 4/18/06, Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > Hi Jef, > > Thank you for clarifying. I think that the link you've provided refers to > source code. The source code is mine and I am perfectly willing to provide > whatever (commercial included) license you require. But, do images also > fall into the "Open Source" category? While there is a lot of explanation > of what "Open Source" is, it talks about source code I think, not images. > > Can the images be licensed for non-commercial purposes while the source > code can be for commercial as that article indicates? After all, it is the > code that would form the basis of my package, not the images The package including all its subcomponents must be under acceptable licenses. This is to help stop boobytrapped packages where some sub-component (image, sound file, text) is included that could not be included by a 3rd party wanting to make/sell say "Fedora Core 5 Extras DVD" or similar party. The subcomponent does not even have to be used by the compiled programs.. as its mere presence in the rpm/src.rpm/tar ball/etc could result in problems for any 3rd party. -- Stephen J Smoogen. CSIRT/Linux System Administrator From wart at kobold.org Tue Apr 18 21:26:28 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Wart) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:26:28 -0700 Subject: A licensing question In-Reply-To: <20060418210404.87178.qmail@web32607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060418210404.87178.qmail@web32607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <44455984.3060706@kobold.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > Hi Jef, > > Thank you for clarifying. I think that the link you've provided refers to source code. The source code is mine and I am perfectly willing to provide whatever (commercial included) license you require. But, do images also fall into the "Open Source" category? While there is a lot of explanation of what "Open Source" is, it talks about source code I think, not images. > > Can the images be licensed for non-commercial purposes while the source code can be for commercial as that article indicates? After all, it is the code that would form the basis of my package, not the images Unfortunately, no. non-commercial clauses are just as unsuitable for images used in Fedora packages as non-commercial clauses for source code. I've contacted the fedora art list and mentioned the issue of finding freely redistributable artwork for game packages, specifically yours. While nobody seemed to object to the idea of using the Fedora Art group to produce game images, there has not yet been any volunteers to do any of the actual work either. - --Mike > > Thanks, > Victor. > > Jeff Spaleta wrote: On 4/18/06, Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > >> Would you please elaborate on as to why it is unacceptable? I though >>Fedora is, by definitiion, non-commercial. > > > While the Fedora project itself does not monetarily profit from the > codebase, the project endeavors to protect the right/freedom of other > people to use the sourcecode base as the basis for a commercial > endeavor. For example its perfectly acceptable for 3rd party vendors > to commercially sell mediasets(with the appropriate warranty) of the > fedora core and extras repositories. By including some packages which > can not be included in such mediasets, you have greatly complicated > vendor involvement. > > I suggest you become more familiar with the OSI definition of "open > source" as a general guiding principle as to what licensing terms are > acceptable. > http://opensource.org/docs/definition.html > Non-commercial clauses fail OSI's "No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor" > principle and thus unacceptable. > > -jef > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFERVmDDeYlPfs40g8RArSuAJ42WznFGCvMumzYDUNiU+pXLwh9dgCeNe3F BcEyg2oBRQBQu4q/ROAgKL4= =Rcpt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From vic_sk at yahoo.com Tue Apr 18 21:28:40 2006 From: vic_sk at yahoo.com (Victor Skovorodnikov) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:28:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: A licensing question In-Reply-To: <80d7e4090604181421j1a4ffb0dk554386156dc6972f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060418212841.61954.qmail@web32612.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Stephen John Smoogen wrote: The subcomponent does not even have to be used by the compiled programs.. as its mere presence in the rpm/src.rpm/tar ball/etc could result in problems for any 3rd party. Hi Stephen, A 3rd party whose images I am using is willing to provide a "non-commercial attribution share-alike creative commons license" which is fine by them. It's not acceptable then even for the images? I just would like to be clear on that because I'll do my own images instead then (or maybe ask them nicely for a commercial license). Thanks, Victor. --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2?/min or less. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jspaleta at gmail.com Tue Apr 18 21:28:44 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 17:28:44 -0400 Subject: A licensing question In-Reply-To: <20060418210404.87178.qmail@web32607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <604aa7910604181340r265499ey1db77df802156c76@mail.gmail.com> <20060418210404.87178.qmail@web32607.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910604181428w28d30c4bv479a23da0d94d2b5@mail.gmail.com> On 4/18/06, Victor Skovorodnikov wrote: > Can the images be licensed for non-commercial purposes while the source > code can be for commercial as that article indicates? After all, it is the > code that would form the basis of my package, not the images You are picking nits. The point is that all the copyrighted material that Fedora distributes must allow for commercial use. Whether that copyrighted material be images or sounds or sourcecode or whatever... the copyright license associated with whatever the Fedora project distributes must allow for commercial use. Distributing "content" such as images or sounds which has the burden of "non-commercial" use restrictions adds just as much complexity to redistribution and is just as limiting for downstream consumers as "sourcecode" with non-commercial usage restrictions. At the end of the day what matters is the downstream consumers ability to use what the Fedora project provides however they as users see fit, while also making sure downstream modifications are made available back to the rest of the Fedora community. Sure, requiring people to "share-alike" with their modification is a burden on usage, but a burden which is counter-balanced by the desire to protect the common interest of the community to have the modified works available just as the original was made available. Non-commercial usage clauses on ANYTHING in the Fedora project codebase is a burden on usage that has no counter-balancing function which protects the common community interests. Non-commericial clauses are arbitrary restrictions that do nothing but protect the potential commercial interests of the original authors at the expense of the potential commercial interest of future community contributors. -jef From vic_sk at yahoo.com Tue Apr 18 21:34:50 2006 From: vic_sk at yahoo.com (Victor Skovorodnikov) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:34:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: A licensing question In-Reply-To: <44455984.3060706@kobold.org> Message-ID: <20060418213450.81971.qmail@web32602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Wart wrote:Unfortunately, no. non-commercial clauses are just as unsuitable for images used in Fedora packages as non-commercial clauses for source code. Aha! got it. It's all clear now. Thanks a lot guys. Victor. --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 22:06:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 18:06:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178900] Review Request: monodoc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604182206.k3IM6s56008700@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: monodoc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178900 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-18 18:06 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodoc.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodoc-1.1.13-4.src.rpm Lots of fixes to the spec file libdir is now /usr/lib irrespective of architecture built on -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 22:08:39 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 18:08:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178901] Review Request: gtksourceview-sharp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604182208.k3IM8doJ009014@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gtksourceview-sharp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178901 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-18 18:08 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/gtksourceview-sharp.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/gtksourceview-sharp-2.0-4.src.rpm libdir now set to /usr/lib irrespective of hardware built on spec file fixes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 22:11:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 18:11:27 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604182211.k3IMBRu4009653@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-18 18:11 EST ------- Spec Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodevelop.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.smmp.salford.ac.uk/packages/monodevelop-0.10-4.src.rpm libdir now set to /usr/lib irrespective of hardware (fixes the boo bug in part) spec file changes forgot to change the version number to -5 for some reason!!! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 22:40:13 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 18:40:13 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604182240.k3IMeDbq016373@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From lyz27 at yahoo.com 2006-04-18 18:39 EST ------- boo compiles and installs cleanly now. Thanks There may be a tiny bug though In the created bin/Makefile , the test command looks in one place and then creates a directory somewhere else install-booDATA: $(boo_DATA) @$(NORMAL_INSTALL) test -z "$(boodir)" || $(mkdir_p) "$(DESTDIR)$(boodir)" On my machine this did test -z "/usr/lib/boo" || mkdir -p -- "/var/tmp/boo-0.7.5.2013-3-root-root/usr/lib/boo" -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 18 22:49:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 18:49:40 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604182249.k3IMneEE018440@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-18 18:49 EST ------- What it's doing is it's looking for /usr/lib/boo and when it's not found, creating it in %{buildroot} which is correct (the spec file says to do that). If you were building the rpm not in the FC rpmbuild system, but using the old, bung it into /usr/src/SOURCES, change to root, build, it would look for /usr/lib/boo and then create /usr/lib/boo if it wasn't found. At least, that's how I understand it! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 00:44:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 20:44:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604190044.k3J0ikbw007538@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From lyz27 at yahoo.com 2006-04-18 20:44 EST ------- Ok. Good deal. Couple more things: I think that you need to add --enable-boo to the configure of monodevelop.spec to enable boo. Even after this change, it doesn't work on 64 bit systems since the check for boo in the monodevelop configure script runs the command: pkg-config --exists "boo >= 0.7.5.2013" will not work as pkg-config will look for the .pc files under /usr/lib64/pkgconfig and the .pc file for boo is under /usr/lib/pkgconfig . The build of mono-debugger fails. I believe that this is a bug with the source code, not the package. I downloaded the package from the go-mono site and got the same error. I'm hoping someone knows where to redirect this better than I. [root at localhost server]# make if /bin/sh ../../libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../.. -D_REENTRANT -pthread -I/usr/lib64/pkg config/../../include -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib64/glib-2.0/include -D_GNU_SOURCE -g -Wall -Wunused -Wmissing-p rototypes -Wmissing-declarations -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wnested-externs -Wshadow -Wpointer-arith -Wno- cast-qual -Wcast-align -Wwrite-strings -MT x86-ptrace.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/x86-ptrace.Tpo" -c -o x86-ptrace.lo x86-ptrace. c; \ then mv -f ".deps/x86-ptrace.Tpo" ".deps/x86-ptrace.Plo"; else rm -f ".deps/x86-ptrace.Tpo"; exit 1; fi gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../.. -D_REENTRANT -pthread -I/usr/lib64/pkgconfig/../../include -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/ usr/lib64/glib-2.0/include -D_GNU_SOURCE -g -Wall -Wunused -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wnested-externs -Wshadow -Wpointer-arith -Wno-cast-qual -Wcast-align -Wwrite-strings -MT x86-ptrace.l o -MD -MP -MF .deps/x86-ptrace.Tpo -c x86-ptrace.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/x86-ptrace.o In file included from /usr/include/asm/user.h:4, from x86_64-arch.h:10, from x86-arch.h:45, from x86-linux-ptrace.h:4, from x86-ptrace.c:35: /usr/include/asm-x86_64/user.h:56: error: expected specifier-qualifier-list before 'u64' In file included from x86-ptrace.c:437: x86-linux-ptrace.c: In function 'do_wait': x86-linux-ptrace.c:128: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 2 of 'waitpid' differ in signedness x86-linux-ptrace.c: In function 'server_ptrace_global_wait': x86-linux-ptrace.c:160: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 2 of 'do_wait' differ in signedness x86-linux-ptrace.c: In function '_server_ptrace_setup_inferior': x86-linux-ptrace.c:293: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 2 of 'do_wait' differ in signedness x86-linux-ptrace.c: In function 'server_ptrace_get_application': x86-linux-ptrace.c:461: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast In file included from x86-ptrace.c:447: x86_64-arch.c: In function 'server_ptrace_call_method_1': x86_64-arch.c:707: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 1 of 'strcpy' differ in signedness x86-ptrace.c: At top level: x86-ptrace.c:474: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type x86-ptrace.c:492: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type make: *** [x86-ptrace.lo] Error 1 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From michael at knox.net.nz Wed Apr 19 04:32:18 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 16:32:18 +1200 Subject: when to ignore rpmlint errors? Message-ID: <4445BD52.4050704@knox.net.nz> Hey all, I am getting what I would call "false positives" with rpmlint. It errors with "script-without-shellbang" on html pages. Is it OK to ignore this? is there any reason why rpmlint complains on html pages? Michael From peter at thecodergeek.com Wed Apr 19 04:36:15 2006 From: peter at thecodergeek.com (Peter Gordon) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 21:36:15 -0700 Subject: when to ignore rpmlint errors? In-Reply-To: <4445BD52.4050704@knox.net.nz> References: <4445BD52.4050704@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <4445BE3F.6060601@thecodergeek.com> Michael J. Knox wrote: > It errors with "script-without-shellbang" on html pages. > > Is it OK to ignore this? is there any reason why rpmlint complains on > html pages? Perhaps the HTML files are executable? They only need be world-readable (though their parent folder must have the executable bit set). -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 254 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From rc040203 at freenet.de Wed Apr 19 04:45:02 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 06:45:02 +0200 Subject: when to ignore rpmlint errors? In-Reply-To: <4445BD52.4050704@knox.net.nz> References: <4445BD52.4050704@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <1145421903.24902.1.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 16:32 +1200, Michael J. Knox wrote: > Hey all, > > I am getting what I would call "false positives" with rpmlint. > > It errors with "script-without-shellbang" on html pages. Check these page's permissions, they are probably "set executable". Ralf From michael at knox.net.nz Wed Apr 19 04:59:44 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 16:59:44 +1200 Subject: when to ignore rpmlint errors? In-Reply-To: <1145421903.24902.1.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <4445BD52.4050704@knox.net.nz> <1145421903.24902.1.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <4445C3C0.2030706@knox.net.nz> Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 16:32 +1200, Michael J. Knox wrote: >> Hey all, >> >> I am getting what I would call "false positives" with rpmlint. >> >> It errors with "script-without-shellbang" on html pages. > Check these page's permissions, they are probably "set executable". > Looks like they are... thanks all! Michael From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 06:20:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 02:20:11 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604190620.k3J6KBmF028498@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-19 02:19 EST ------- Thanks for the report, I'll enable boo and see what happens with the built. The other one is a bug not with the mono-debugger source but with one of the FC packages. I'll find out which and enter it into the main BZ (it's prob. a gcc one) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 06:23:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 02:23:33 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604190623.k3J6NXUu029416@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-19 02:23 EST ------- That error comes from glibc-kernheaders -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Wed Apr 19 06:37:28 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:37:28 +0100 Subject: Becoming a sponsorer Message-ID: <1145428649.9234.10.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, Given what I know about mono and how to package it and wotnot, I think I'm up to the job of becoming a sponsor on it (there seems to be only me and Chris Aillon who does things with mono - I'm sorry if anyone else is and I've missed them - but there is a shortage of peeps who know about these things). What do I need to do to be reach such a high position? TTFN Paul -- Computer sind Klimaanlagen sehr ?hnlich: beide funktionieren, es sei denn man ?ffnet die Fenster -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 06:56:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 02:56:22 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175198] Review Request: perl-Math-Pari In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604190656.k3J6uMQe005997@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Math-Pari https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175198 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-04-19 02:56 EST ------- Thanks for the review. Build on target fedora-development-extras succeeded. Build logs may be found at http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/7835-perl-Math-Pari-2.010704-2.fc6/ Branch requests for FC-4 and FC-5 made. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 06:57:05 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 02:57:05 -0400 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604190657.k3J6v5DB006288@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: initng https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From daner964 at student.liu.se 2006-04-19 02:56 EST ------- For next release the spec file needs to be fixed to use cmake instead of autotools. I'll fix that up as soon as we have a release. One question: To get selinux working we need to do something like this: ----------pseucocode snip---------------- [if Fedora version >= 5] cmake . -DSELINUX:BOOL=ON [else] cmake . -DOLDSELINUX:BOOL=ON ----------------------------------------- ...instead of the current ./configure line (like I already did in the ifiles spec, except that we just have a "cmake ." there). What's the best way to achieve this? (Oh, and I got a son yesterday. This probably means I won't have much time for anything the coming week(s).) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 07:07:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 03:07:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604190707.k3J77Lg3008933@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: initng https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203 at freenet.de 2006-04-19 03:07 EST ------- (In reply to comment #229) > For next release the spec file needs to be fixed to use cmake instead of > autotools. I'll fix that up as soon as we have a release. Given that upstream seems to be wanting fall into the cmake trap, and given the fact this PR has seen 229 comments, I am inclined to think this package is not ready for inclusion into FE. I am hereby proposing to close this Request as FAILED until this package has matured. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 07:30:37 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 03:30:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604190730.k3J7Ubek016348@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-04-19 03:30 EST ------- (In reply to comment #20) > What it's doing is it's looking for /usr/lib/boo and when it's not found, > creating it in %{buildroot} which is correct (the spec file says to do that). But why does it say that? What's the point? Supposing /usr/lib/boo *does* ecist on the build system. The directory won't get created in the buildroot then. Looks horribly wrong to me. > If you were building the rpm not in the FC rpmbuild system, but using the old, > bung it into /usr/src/SOURCES, change to root, build, it would look for > /usr/lib/boo and then create /usr/lib/boo if it wasn't found. > > At least, that's how I understand it! If you've specified a buildroot in your spec file (as you must), it'll be honoured whether you build it as a regular user or as root. But no sane person builds packages as root. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 07:37:19 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 03:37:19 -0400 Subject: [Bug 167974] Review Request: hugs98 - Haskell Interpreter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604190737.k3J7bJ0K018960@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hugs98 - Haskell Interpreter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167974 ------- Additional Comments From petersen at redhat.com 2006-04-19 03:36 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) > > 2) There seems to a small build problem on fc5: > > Skipping OpenAL package > There are quite some incompatibilities between openal 0.0.9 > and previous versions. Ok, that's what I suspected. > > 3) Probably the description should be made more concise. > Is the first paragraph enough? Yeah, that should be fine, or it could be a little more verbose if you prefer. > > 8) if demos/ (2.3MB) is to be included, it must be subpackaged into > > a separate subpackage (say hugs98-demos). > Ok, but I still install them into /usr/lib/hugs. Ok, but a better place would probably be to move them to under /usr/share/doc/. BTW the two largest subdirs are: 732k HaXml 1156k GLUT (RedBook/Data/leeds.bin 708k) > One could also subpackage the packages like opengl etc... I prefer > not to, but if you think it is better... In the longer term I think it is something we should consider (also for ghc). For example: 596 X11 616 GLUT (requires OpenGL) 1908 OpenGL probably aren't used by that many hugs users, so it might make sense to separate them out. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From paul at city-fan.org Wed Apr 19 07:53:51 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:53:51 +0100 Subject: Becoming a sponsorer In-Reply-To: <1145428649.9234.10.camel@T7.Linux> References: <1145428649.9234.10.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <1145433232.7700.31.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 07:37 +0100, Paul wrote: > Hi, > > Given what I know about mono and how to package it and wotnot, I think > I'm up to the job of becoming a sponsor on it (there seems to be only me > and Chris Aillon who does things with mono - I'm sorry if anyone else is > and I've missed them - but there is a shortage of peeps who know about > these things). Perhaps you could take a look at this and suggest what might be wrong: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg02085.html > What do I need to do to be reach such a high position? Be seen to give good advice on a regular basis. Paul. From pertusus at free.fr Wed Apr 19 08:00:56 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:00:56 +0200 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: <200604190707.k3J77Lg3008933@www.beta.redhat.com> References: <200604190707.k3J77Lg3008933@www.beta.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060419080056.GA2396@free.fr> > Given that upstream seems to be wanting fall into the cmake trap, and given the What is wrong with cmake (I have just approved paraview, which is based on cmake ;-)? -- Pat From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Wed Apr 19 08:29:10 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:29:10 +0000 Subject: Becoming a sponsorer In-Reply-To: <1145433232.7700.31.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> References: <1145428649.9234.10.camel@T7.Linux> <1145433232.7700.31.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> Message-ID: <20060419082910.M46018@all-the-johnsons.co.uk> > On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 07:37 +0100, Paul wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Given what I know about mono and how to package it and wotnot, I think > > I'm up to the job of becoming a sponsor on it (there seems to be only me > > and Chris Aillon who does things with mono - I'm sorry if anyone else is > > and I've missed them - but there is a shortage of peeps who know about > > these things). > > Perhaps you could take a look at this and suggest what might be > wrong: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg02085.html By the looks of it (and this is based *purely* on a cursory look over it) there is a problem with an assertion. Now, given it builds fine on a (I'm guessing) an x86 box and not on any other architecture, the problem is most likely down to where the buildsys is looking for packages. Personally, I'd add at the top %define _libdir /usr/lib, remove the speed up you have for the build (removal of the tracking dependancies) and change the make install to make DESTDIR=%{buildroot} install and you'll probably find that will work just fine. One thing that is puzzling me is why you have the same export in two places. Surely when you run the configure step that will remember what you've exported as it will be written to a file somewhere in the BUILD/ directory. Mono is a strange beast which (from what I can see) has little respect for where things should be placed! ;-) > > What do I need to do to be reach such a high position? > > Be seen to give good advice on a regular basis. On the mono sides of things, I think I'm doing okay then :-) -- Get your free @ukpost.com account now http://www.ukpost.com/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 08:28:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 04:28:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604190828.k3J8Shqr003077@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-19 04:28 EST ------- "If you've specified a buildroot in your spec file (as you must), it'll be honoured whether you build it as a regular user or as root. But no sane person builds packages as root." True, but as I've said, when RPMS were built prior to the incredibly useful fedora-rpmdev system, rpm building was performed in /usr/src or as a priviledged user (or at least that's the way I was always told to do it - which is why I never did - it was a recipe for disaster!) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From rc040203 at freenet.de Wed Apr 19 08:38:50 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:38:50 +0200 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: <20060419080056.GA2396@free.fr> References: <200604190707.k3J77Lg3008933@www.beta.redhat.com> <20060419080056.GA2396@free.fr> Message-ID: <1145435931.24902.17.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 10:00 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > Given that upstream seems to be wanting fall into the cmake trap, and given the > > What is wrong with cmake To me, cmake is the return of Imake in different clothes. AFAICT, it suffers from the design flaws as imake did, but due to it's "youth" it probably suffers from even worse defects/bugs/unflexibility. > (I have just approved paraview, which is based on > cmake ;-)? Every developer has the freedom to chose his poison :-) Cmake isn't the tool I'd chose. However, my remark on the PR (the part you cut) was implied to say: Given the fact upstream initng is switch the basis of their configuration, disqualifies this package as not stable/mature mature enough. Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 09:01:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 05:01:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604190901.k3J91r9s013712@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2006-04-19 05:01 EST ------- (In reply to comment #25) > "If you've specified a buildroot in your spec file (as you must), it'll be > honoured whether you build it as a regular user or as root. But no sane person > builds packages as root." > > True, but as I've said, when RPMS were built prior to the incredibly useful > fedora-rpmdev system, rpm building was performed in /usr/src or as a priviledged > user (or at least that's the way I was always told to do it - which is why I > never did - it was a recipe for disaster!) Even when building as root under /usr/src/redhat, rpmbuild would honour the BuildRoot: setting in your spec file and not go creating /usr/lib/boo or whatever if the construct described in Comment #19 was used. It would only create /usr/lib/boo if the Makefile was broken and didn't use DESTDIR properly. If you don't believe me, try it with a simple spec/Makefile that just creates the directory. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From paul at city-fan.org Wed Apr 19 09:22:24 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:22:24 +0100 Subject: Becoming a sponsorer In-Reply-To: <20060419082910.M46018@all-the-johnsons.co.uk> References: <1145428649.9234.10.camel@T7.Linux> <1145433232.7700.31.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <20060419082910.M46018@all-the-johnsons.co.uk> Message-ID: <44460150.2040903@city-fan.org> Paul F. Johnson wrote: >> On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 07:37 +0100, Paul wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Given what I know about mono and how to package it and wotnot, I think >>> I'm up to the job of becoming a sponsor on it (there seems to be only me >>> and Chris Aillon who does things with mono - I'm sorry if anyone else is >>> and I've missed them - but there is a shortage of peeps who know about >>> these things). >> Perhaps you could take a look at this and suggest what might be >> wrong: > http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg02085.html > > By the looks of it (and this is based *purely* on a cursory look over it) > there is a problem with an assertion. Now, given it builds fine on a (I'm > guessing) an x86 box and not on any other architecture, the problem is most > likely down to where the buildsys is looking for packages. It's not an architecture issue because it builds OK on my x86 box but fails in mock on the very same x86 box. I thought at first it was a missing buildreq but I can't think of anything appropriate to add. So it's probably something to do with the mock environment itself. Unfortunately the assertion failure is pretty unhelpful in terms of diagnostics. > Personally, I'd add at the top > > %define _libdir /usr/lib, remove the speed up you have for the build (removal > of the tracking dependancies) OK, tried that. Didn't help. > and change the make install to > > make DESTDIR=%{buildroot} install Huh? That's what it already is (except with the macro version of "make" used) > and you'll probably find that will work just fine. One thing that is puzzling > me is why you have the same export in two places. Surely when you run the > configure step that will remember what you've exported as it will be written > to a file somewhere in the BUILD/ directory. Not sure about this; this is an idiom I spotted in a few mono specs I looked at whilst trying to figure out what was breaking. If the configure script *doesn't* record the setting in the Makefile, then the multiple exports would certainly be needed as the %build and %install scripts are separate shell scripts. > Mono is a strange beast which (from what I can see) has little respect for > where things should be placed! ;-) Yeah, I noticed. Paul. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 09:17:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 05:17:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604190917.k3J9HcJ0018461@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 ------- Additional Comments From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk 2006-04-19 05:17 EST ------- There is currently a problem with --enable-boo and --enable-debugger debugger is not supported due to API changes and --enable-boo just seems to be broken (monodevelop refuses to build with it enabled) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Wed Apr 19 09:30:19 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:30:19 +0000 Subject: Becoming a sponsorer In-Reply-To: <44460150.2040903@city-fan.org> References: <1145428649.9234.10.camel@T7.Linux> <1145433232.7700.31.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <20060419082910.M46018@all-the-johnsons.co.uk> <44460150.2040903@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <20060419093019.M84061@all-the-johnsons.co.uk> Hi, > It's not an architecture issue because it builds OK on my x86 box > but fails in mock on the very same x86 box. I thought at first it > was a missing buildreq but I can't think of anything appropriate to > add. So it's probably something to do with the mock environment > itself. Unfortunately the assertion failure is pretty unhelpful in > terms of diagnostics. It certainly would point to a mock problem. Which architecture are you try to get mock to build it as? > > and change the make install to > > > > make DESTDIR=%{buildroot} install > > Huh? That's what it already is (except with the macro version of > "make" used) Just removing the possibility of a macro problem > > and you'll probably find that will work just fine. One thing that is puzzling > > me is why you have the same export in two places. Surely when you run the > > configure step that will remember what you've exported as it will be written > > to a file somewhere in the BUILD/ directory. > > Not sure about this; this is an idiom I spotted in a few mono specs > I looked at whilst trying to figure out what was breaking. If the > configure script *doesn't* record the setting in the Makefile, then > the multiple exports would certainly be needed as the %build and > %install scripts are separate shell scripts. Fair enough > > Mono is a strange beast which (from what I can see) has little respect for > > where things should be placed! ;-) > > Yeah, I noticed. I normally work it like this to eliminate problems. Build with /usr/lib set statically, do a basic build (%configure and make DESTDIR install without any other parameters). If that builds, move it to my x86_64 box and build. If that's happy then I try with mock. With each build, it's tested to ensure things aren't broken[1]. Once the builds are happy like that, then I move it to mock. Now, if the build fails (as has happened with monodevelop on quite a few occassions), then I start looking at where it fails and check the makefile. If it still fails then I hand code the %install step (which can be bloomin' long!) If only mono packages were sane! TTFN Paul [1] The problem here is that I tend to have a large number of packages on my test system, so I don't always pick up on missing deps (see my submission for gtksourceview-sharp) -- Get your free @ukpost.com account now http://www.ukpost.com/ From paul at city-fan.org Wed Apr 19 09:55:21 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:55:21 +0100 Subject: Becoming a sponsorer In-Reply-To: <20060419093019.M84061@all-the-johnsons.co.uk> References: <1145428649.9234.10.camel@T7.Linux> <1145433232.7700.31.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <20060419082910.M46018@all-the-johnsons.co.uk> <44460150.2040903@city-fan.org> <20060419093019.M84061@all-the-johnsons.co.uk> Message-ID: <44460909.5040704@city-fan.org> Paul F. Johnson wrote: > Hi, > >> It's not an architecture issue because it builds OK on my x86 box >> but fails in mock on the very same x86 box. I thought at first it >> was a missing buildreq but I can't think of anything appropriate to >> add. So it's probably something to do with the mock environment >> itself. Unfortunately the assertion failure is pretty unhelpful in >> terms of diagnostics. > > It certainly would point to a mock problem. Which architecture are you try to > get mock to build it as? Mock on x86 can only build x86 packages (unlike x64_64). >>> and change the make install to >>> >>> make DESTDIR=%{buildroot} install >> Huh? That's what it already is (except with the macro version of >> "make" used) > > Just removing the possibility of a macro problem %{__make} definitely expands to /usr/bin/make so that's not going to be the issue. >>> Mono is a strange beast which (from what I can see) has little respect for >>> where things should be placed! ;-) >> Yeah, I noticed. > > I normally work it like this to eliminate problems. Build with /usr/lib set > statically, do a basic build (%configure and make DESTDIR install without any > other parameters). If that builds, move it to my x86_64 box and build. If > that's happy then I try with mock. > > With each build, it's tested to ensure things aren't broken[1]. > > Once the builds are happy like that, then I move it to mock. Not an option for me at the moment as I don't have access to an x86_64 box running anything later than RHEL3. > Now, if the build fails (as has happened with monodevelop on quite a few > occassions), then I start looking at where it fails and check the makefile. In this case it's failing when running /usr/bin/mcs (whatever that is). > [1] The problem here is that I tend to have a large number of packages on my > test system, so I don't always pick up on missing deps (see my submission for > gtksourceview-sharp) This is why I do local mock builds, which find missing deps very quickly. Paul. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Wed Apr 19 10:04:24 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul F. Johnson) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:04:24 +0000 Subject: Becoming a sponsorer In-Reply-To: <44460909.5040704@city-fan.org> References: <1145428649.9234.10.camel@T7.Linux> <1145433232.7700.31.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <20060419082910.M46018@all-the-johnsons.co.uk> <44460150.2040903@city-fan.org> <20060419093019.M84061@all-the-johnsons.co.uk> <44460909.5040704@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <20060419100424.M50233@all-the-johnsons.co.uk> Hi, > > Now, if the build fails (as has happened with monodevelop on quite a few > > occassions), then I start looking at where it fails and check the makefile. > > In this case it's failing when running /usr/bin/mcs (whatever that > is). mcs is the C# compiler. It is the mono equivalent of the MS csc command line compiler. TTFN Paul From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 10:22:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 06:22:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191022.k3JAMraj006425@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: initng https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-19 06:22 EST ------- (In reply to comment #229) > ...instead of the current ./configure line (like I already did in the ifiles > spec, except that we just have a "cmake ." there). What's the best way to > achieve this? You could have a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag To test (for example to have %dist set to el3) rpmbuild -ba --define "dist el3" initng.spec Or use mock. In that case you may have to set in mock cfg file config_opts['buildgroup'] = 'build build-base build-minimal' -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 10:50:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 06:50:10 -0400 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191050.k3JAoAav014958@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: initng https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr 2006-04-19 06:49 EST ------- (In reply to comment #230) > fact this PR has seen 229 comments, I am inclined to think this package is not > ready for inclusion into FE. > > I am hereby proposing to close this Request as FAILED until this package has > matured. I disagree, not on the fact that this package isn't ready for inclusion into FE. But that closing the request as FAILED is a good thing. Indeed I think that the review process done here helps the upstream to ameliorate the package, an maybe more importantly to structurate it such that it is easier to package, and this is easier if the review is kept alive. Given how long the current review is, it may be right to close it and reopen another review, such that unneeded history is forgotten, but I believe that a review for inclusion in extras should be continued. It would make sense to reopen reviews now that the sources are splitted, but that's only my opinion. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Wed Apr 19 13:40:09 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:40:09 +0100 Subject: Order of searching Message-ID: <1145454009.9590.70.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, AIUI, /usr/local/bin is looked in before /usr/bin which is before /bin. The same applies to /usr/local/lib. However, I've noticed with some of my mono packages that when I explicitly say the _libdir is /usr/lib, that the compiled binaries look in /usr/lib64/pkgconfig for a .pc file when they are actually in /usr/lib/pkgconfig (64 bit architecture obviously!) I'm at a loss as to how to fix this. Shouldn't the same order system work as normal (i.e. /usr/lib64/pkgconfig fails so look in /usr/lib/pkgconfig)? TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 19 13:58:36 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 15:58:36 +0200 Subject: Order of searching In-Reply-To: <1145454009.9590.70.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1145454009.9590.70.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <20060419155836.4fc5ce9b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:40:09 +0100, PFJ wrote: > Hi, > > AIUI, /usr/local/bin is looked in before /usr/bin which is before /bin. > The same applies to /usr/local/lib. > > However, I've noticed with some of my mono packages that when I > explicitly say the _libdir is /usr/lib, that the compiled binaries look > in /usr/lib64/pkgconfig for a .pc file when they are actually > in /usr/lib/pkgconfig (64 bit architecture obviously!) Which binaries? pkg-config? If not, you need to examine whether your %_libdir re-definition is really picked up and makes it into your compiled binaries (via Makefiles or customised header files). > I'm at a loss as to how to fix this. Shouldn't the same order system > work as normal (i.e. /usr/lib64/pkgconfig fails so look > in /usr/lib/pkgconfig)? No. PKG_CONFIG_PATH search order is libdir/pkgconfig:datadir/pkgconfig with libdir and datadir being build-time constants. So, if you compile pkg-config with %_libdir = /usr/lib64, it searches in /usr/lib64/pkgconfig and never in /usr/lib/pkgconfig. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Wed Apr 19 14:02:25 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 15:02:25 +0100 Subject: Order of searching In-Reply-To: <20060419155836.4fc5ce9b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1145454009.9590.70.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <20060419155836.4fc5ce9b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1145455345.9590.78.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, > > I'm at a loss as to how to fix this. Shouldn't the same order system > > work as normal (i.e. /usr/lib64/pkgconfig fails so look > > in /usr/lib/pkgconfig)? > > No. PKG_CONFIG_PATH search order is libdir/pkgconfig:datadir/pkgconfig > with libdir and datadir being build-time constants. So, if you compile > pkg-config with %_libdir = /usr/lib64, it searches in /usr/lib64/pkgconfig > and never in /usr/lib/pkgconfig. Looks like mono is not picking up libdir as /usr/lib and using it's own. It should be simple enough to fix, I just pass --libdir=/usr/lib and that should do the trick. When I looked though when the package is being made, libdir was set as /usr/lib, so it might be something else. Thanks for the pointer. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Wed Apr 19 14:30:35 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 16:30:35 +0200 Subject: QA things Message-ID: <200604191430.k3JEUZvT002284@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Hi folks, There now is a CVS repo where I put a couple scripts for QA related things: http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/status-report-scripts/?root=fedora I took a stab at getting the owners.list properly sorted. Let me know if I got things wrong. The script to check proper ordering and a few other things (proper number of columns, etc.) is in the above repo. Also, still looking for comments about the QA SIG wiki page... :-) (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/QA) Cheers, Christian From tibbs at math.uh.edu Wed Apr 19 14:38:07 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:38:07 -0500 Subject: Closing accepted review tickets Message-ID: Is it acceptable for the reviewer to close an accepted review ticket once the package is checked in, build, and pushed? Or should that only be done by the package owner? - J< From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Wed Apr 19 14:40:09 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 15:40:09 +0100 Subject: Closing accepted review tickets In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1145457609.9590.82.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, > Is it acceptable for the reviewer to close an accepted review ticket > once the package is checked in, build, and pushed? Or should that > only be done by the package owner? IMHO, the owner. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Wed Apr 19 14:46:35 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 16:46:35 +0200 Subject: Closing accepted review tickets In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:38:07 CDT." Message-ID: <200604191446.k3JEkZTY002517@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> tibbs at math.uh.edu said: > Is it acceptable for the reviewer to close an accepted review ticket once the > package is checked in, build, and pushed? Or should that only be done by the > package owner? That should be done by the owner. How about adding a comment to the ticket, asking why it's not closed yet ? Sometimes, there's a reason that can be discussed... Cheers, Christian From tibbs at math.uh.edu Wed Apr 19 15:25:38 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:25:38 -0500 Subject: Closing accepted review tickets In-Reply-To: <200604191446.k3JEkZTY002517@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> (Christian Iseli's message of "Wed, 19 Apr 2006 16:46:35 +0200") References: <200604191446.k3JEkZTY002517@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: >>>>> "CI" == Christian Iseli writes: CI> That should be done by the owner. How about adding a comment to CI> the ticket, asking why it's not closed yet ? I did so a few days ago; I'll give it a week and try again. - J< From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:11:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:11:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 167974] Review Request: hugs98 - Haskell Interpreter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191611.k3JGBhEB003583@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hugs98 - Haskell Interpreter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167974 ------- Additional Comments From gemi at bluewin.ch 2006-04-19 12:11 EST ------- Here is the new srpm: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/5/i386/SRPMS.gemi/hugs98-2005.03-1.fc5.src.rpm * I moved the demos into /usr/share/doc. I also remove the Makefile which doesn't make sense in this context. * I split off the packages x11, opengl, glut and hgl. I hope I got the dependencies right. I used lowercase names, because I find it aesthetically more pleasing :-) I can change that if necessary. * I make the demos package depend on hugs98-glut and hugs98-hgl, since there are demos that use them. I wouldn't want to further split the demos package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:25:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:25:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191625.k3JGP7Ud006400@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: initng https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459 ------- Additional Comments From michel.vandenbergh at uhasselt.be 2006-04-19 12:24 EST ------- Please do not close initng. Even though perhaps not ready for extras, it is very usable. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:28:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:28:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178904] Review Request: Monodevelop In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191628.k3JGSsHW007331@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178904 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:30:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:30:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 173459] Review Request: initng In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191630.k3JGUVpW007893@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: initng https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:35:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:35:04 -0400 Subject: [Bug 166253] Review Request: perl-Gtk2-GladeXML In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191635.k3JGZ4kN009764@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Gtk2-GladeXML https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166253 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:35:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:35:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177827] Review Request: python-ctypes - Advanced Foreign Function Interface for Python In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191635.k3JGZH5B009856@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-ctypes - Advanced Foreign Function Interface for Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177827 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:35:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:35:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177235] Review Request: sysconftool - Macros for aclocal to install configuration files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191635.k3JGZkgM010052@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sysconftool - Macros for aclocal to install configuration files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177235 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:36:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:36:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178162] Review Request: libgeotiff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191636.k3JGa9qB010210@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libgeotiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178162 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:36:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:36:34 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177507] Review Request: pida In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191636.k3JGaYrA010339@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pida https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177507 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:36:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:36:58 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179237] Review Request: swaks - A command-line SMTP transaction tester In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191636.k3JGawxo010523@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: swaks - A command-line SMTP transaction tester https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179237 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:37:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:37:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 174063] Review Request: cssed - css editor and validator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191637.k3JGbViW010838@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cssed - css editor and validator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174063 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:37:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:37:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 174783] Review Request: gruler In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191637.k3JGbsgl011069@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gruler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174783 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:38:17 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:38:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191638.k3JGcHhu011228@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:38:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:38:51 -0400 Subject: [Bug 168690] Review Request: pyBackPack (GTK+ Python backup tool) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191638.k3JGcpZn011472@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pyBackPack (GTK+ Python backup tool) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168690 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:38:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:38:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176697] Review Request: i386-rtems4.7-binutils In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191638.k3JGcxNC011531@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: i386-rtems4.7-binutils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176697 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:39:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:39:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 174290] HDate-applet is an applet to show the hebrew date (calendar) using the libhdate library and the gnome-2.0 graphics library. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191639.k3JGdCCn011636@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: HDate-applet is an applet to show the hebrew date (calendar) using the libhdate library and the gnome-2.0 graphics library. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174290 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:39:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:39:45 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177134] Review Request: mkvtoolnix - Matroska container utilites In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191639.k3JGdjRg011813@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mkvtoolnix - Matroska container utilites https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177134 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:40:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:40:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 169345] Review Request: SEC - Simple Event Correlator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191640.k3JGe9Th011934@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SEC - Simple Event Correlator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169345 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:40:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:40:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177401] Review Request: clamsmtp - SMTP filter for ClamAV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191640.k3JGehJ1012092@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: clamsmtp - SMTP filter for ClamAV https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177401 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:40:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:40:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175127] Review Request: wavbreaker - Tool for splitting .wav files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191640.k3JGevAI012201@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wavbreaker - Tool for splitting .wav files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175127 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:41:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:41:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177117] Review Request: libtlen - Tlen.pl client library In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191641.k3JGfL17012412@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libtlen - Tlen.pl client library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177117 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:41:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:41:45 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176579] Review Request: ipsvd -- Internet protocol service daemons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191641.k3JGfj2n012553@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ipsvd -- Internet protocol service daemons https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176579 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:42:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:42:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176581] Review Request: fnord -- A very fast HTTP server In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191642.k3JGgIJL012830@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fnord -- A very fast HTTP server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176581 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:42:41 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:42:41 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176071] Review Request: silgraphite In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191642.k3JGgfhi013031@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: silgraphite https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176071 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:43:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:43:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175168] Review Request: gideon - GUI designer for GTK/C++ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191643.k3JGhE6V013508@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gideon - GUI designer for GTK/C++ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175168 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:43:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:43:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 171597] Review Request: spandsp - A DSP library for telephony In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191643.k3JGhn64013709@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: spandsp - A DSP library for telephony https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171597 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:44:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:44:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 171640] Review Request: perl-Log-Dispatch-FileRotate - Log to files that archive/rotate themselves In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191644.k3JGiCjG013860@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Log-Dispatch-FileRotate - Log to files that archive/rotate themselves https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171640 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:44:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:44:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178901] Review Request: gtksourceview-sharp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191644.k3JGiO9W013922@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gtksourceview-sharp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178901 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:45:08 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:45:08 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191645.k3JGj8oc014079@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zaptel-kmod https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177583 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:45:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:45:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 169704] Review Request: mosml - Moscow ML In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191645.k3JGjUfu014167@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mosml - Moscow ML https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169704 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:45:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:45:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 169717] Review Request: Internode DSL usage applet In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191645.k3JGjrQc014254@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Internode DSL usage applet https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169717 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:46:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:46:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 189342] Python egg spec template In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191646.k3JGk7dL014360@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Python egg spec template https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189342 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-19 12:46 EST ------- I have no experience with python eggs, so Cc'ing the FE list for comments about the specfile contents and whether a separate template for them is actually needed. Some questions/notes though, assuming this will be added: fedora-newrpmspec should still continue to use the generic python template, no? Using %{name} and %{name}-%{version} in %files sounds a bit optimistic for my taste, it's not uncommon to slightly deviate from upstream naming in python package names, and I don't see %{name} or %{version} being passed to any build or install commands. --> there's a disconnect Also, the example %files entries use %{python_sitelib}, are the files always installed there, or sometimes to %{python_sitearch}? Due to the two potential issues above, I'd be inclined to just drop the example %files entries. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:46:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 167974] Review Request: hugs98 - Haskell Interpreter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191646.k3JGkGjx014425@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hugs98 - Haskell Interpreter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167974 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:46:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:46:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 171993] Review Request: mpich2 - An implementation of MPI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191646.k3JGkSI4014493@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mpich2 - An implementation of MPI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171993 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:46:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:46:51 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177110] Review Request: geda-gsymcheck - symbol checker for gEDA circuit design software In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191646.k3JGkpjq014566@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geda-gsymcheck - symbol checker for gEDA circuit design software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177110 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:47:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:47:04 -0400 Subject: [Bug 166470] Review Request: taskjuggler In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191647.k3JGl43f014643@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: taskjuggler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166470 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:47:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:47:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177512] Review Request: mysql-connector-net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191647.k3JGlQUW014798@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mysql-connector-net https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177512 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:47:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:47:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177106] Review Request: libgdgeda - graphical library for gEDA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191647.k3JGlhdb014976@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libgdgeda - graphical library for gEDA https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177106 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:48:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:48:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176712] Review Request: i386-rtems4.7-gcc-newlib In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191648.k3JGmGeI015278@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: i386-rtems4.7-gcc-newlib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176712 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:48:30 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:48:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191648.k3JGmU5h015396@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zaptel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177584 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:49:04 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:49:04 -0400 Subject: [Bug 166255] Review Request: Sprog In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191649.k3JGn4jK015589@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Sprog https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166255 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:49:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:49:27 -0400 Subject: [Bug 174952] Review Request: lightning - GNU Lightning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191649.k3JGnR7k015699@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lightning - GNU Lightning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174952 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:50:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:50:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 174866] Review Request: polypaudio: Improved Linux sound server In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191650.k3JGo0MU015826@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: polypaudio: Improved Linux sound server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174866 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:50:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:50:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 174288] Hspell-gui is a graphical front end to hspell In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191650.k3JGoNrN015938@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Hspell-gui is a graphical front end to hspell https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174288 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:50:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:50:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 174377] Review Request:gnu-smalltalk - GNU Smalltalk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191650.k3JGouS8016099@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request:gnu-smalltalk - GNU Smalltalk https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174377 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:51:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:51:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179040] Review Request: socat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191651.k3JGpTSi016265@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: socat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179040 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:51:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Bug 171314] Review Request: compat-gtkhtml36 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191651.k3JGpppY016378@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: compat-gtkhtml36 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171314 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:52:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:52:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 171289] Review Request: dirmngr: Client for Managing/Downloading CRLs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191652.k3JGq3io016451@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: dirmngr: Client for Managing/Downloading CRLs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171289 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:52:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:52:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 168719] Review Request: gdal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191652.k3JGqaQl016626@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gdal https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168719 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:53:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:53:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172755] Review Request: xcompmgr - X11 composite manager In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191653.k3JGrLM6017179@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xcompmgr - X11 composite manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172755 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:53:46 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:53:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177414] Review Request: geda - project manager for gEDA project In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191653.k3JGrkkl017381@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geda - project manager for gEDA project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177414 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:54:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:54:40 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177619] Review Request: python-nltk-lite: Python libraries and programs for natural language processing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191654.k3JGse4e017590@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-nltk-lite: Python libraries and programs for natural language processing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177619 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:55:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:55:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177105] Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191655.k3JGtC8L017741@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnomeradio - Graphical FM-Tuner program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177105 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:55:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:55:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177747] Review Request: glade3 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191655.k3JGtPmZ017793@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: glade3 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177747 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:55:47 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:55:47 -0400 Subject: [Bug 174898] Review Request: perl-HTML-FillInForm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191655.k3JGtlEF017847@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-HTML-FillInForm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174898 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:56:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:56:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177109] Review Request: geda-symbols - symbol repository for gEDA circuit design software In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191656.k3JGu9LG017905@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geda-symbols - symbol repository for gEDA circuit design software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177109 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:56:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:56:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 169703] Review Request: pari - Number Theory-oriented Computer Algebra System In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191656.k3JGuWGm018030@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pari - Number Theory-oriented Computer Algebra System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169703 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:56:55 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:56:55 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177107] Review Request: libgeda - library for gEDA circuit design software In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191656.k3JGut8s018188@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libgeda - library for gEDA circuit design software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177107 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:57:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:57:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177818] Review Request: adplug In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191657.k3JGv7VS018226@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: adplug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177818 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com QAContact|fedora-extras- |fedora-package- |list at redhat.com |review at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:57:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:57:40 -0400 Subject: [Bug 173388] Review Request: Denial of Service evasion module for Apache In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191657.k3JGve0Y018355@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Denial of Service evasion module for Apache https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173388 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:58:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:58:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178003] Review Request: tetex-lambda-jp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191658.k3JGwCJk018552@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tetex-lambda-jp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178003 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:58:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:58:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178900] Review Request: monodoc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191658.k3JGwPRA018680@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: monodoc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178900 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:58:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:58:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 174883] Review Request: distcc -- A free distributed C/C++ compiler system In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191658.k3JGwxV6018863@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: distcc -- A free distributed C/C++ compiler system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174883 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:59:32 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:59:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 166427] Review Request: inform - Compiler for Z-machine story files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191659.k3JGxWEc018999@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: inform - Compiler for Z-machine story files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166427 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 16:59:56 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:59:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177603] Review Request: libpri In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191659.k3JGxuUn019061@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libpri https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177603 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:00:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:00:40 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175047] Review Request: NetworkManager-openvpn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191700.k3JH0eud019170@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: NetworkManager-openvpn https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175047 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:01:12 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:01:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 170303] Review Request: google-perftools: Very fast malloc & performance analysis tools In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191701.k3JH1Ca7019277@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: google-perftools: Very fast malloc & performance analysis tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170303 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:01:35 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:01:35 -0400 Subject: [Bug 173522] Review Request: milter-regex milter filter regular expression based In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191701.k3JH1Zew019373@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: milter-regex milter filter regular expression based https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173522 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:01:58 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:01:58 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177556] Review Request: mod_extract_forwarded In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191701.k3JH1wsx019510@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mod_extract_forwarded https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177556 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:02:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:02:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 166919] Review Request: findlib In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191702.k3JH2Vae019638@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: findlib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166919 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:02:53 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:02:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177580] Review Request: lat (LDAP Administration Tool) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191702.k3JH2rsg019756@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lat (LDAP Administration Tool) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177580 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:03:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:03:27 -0400 Subject: [Bug 173790] Review Request: gstreamer-plugins-fcextras In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191703.k3JH3Rwc020007@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gstreamer-plugins-fcextras https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173790 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:04:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:04:10 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178932] Review Request: AutoScan - A utility for network exploration In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191704.k3JH4AR9020263@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: AutoScan - A utility for network exploration https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178932 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:04:24 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:04:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 171040] Review Request: postgis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191704.k3JH4OhD020361@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: postgis https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171040 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:04:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:04:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 166251] Review Request: perl-Apache-LogRegex In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191704.k3JH4arP020453@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Apache-LogRegex https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166251 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:04:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:04:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177416] Review Request: geda-examples - some examples for gEDA project In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191704.k3JH4n1T020496@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geda-examples - some examples for gEDA project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177416 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:05:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:05:11 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176542] Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191705.k3JH5Beh020563@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnome-yum - GNOME interface for YUM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176542 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:05:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:05:44 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176582] Review Request: freedt -- Reimplementation of Dan Bernstein's daemontools under the GNU GPL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191705.k3JH5i3E020647@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freedt -- Reimplementation of Dan Bernstein's daemontools under the GNU GPL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176582 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:06:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:06:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 167983] Review Request: evolution-caldav In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191706.k3JH6IXW020774@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: evolution-caldav https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167983 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:06:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:06:51 -0400 Subject: [Bug 174286] hocr is a set of Hebrew character recognition utilities In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191706.k3JH6pEB020886@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: hocr is a set of Hebrew character recognition utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174286 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:07:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:07:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177108] Review Request: geda-gschem - schematic editor for gEDA circuit design software In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191707.k3JH7EjU020996@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geda-gschem - schematic editor for gEDA circuit design software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177108 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:07:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:07:27 -0400 Subject: [Bug 167364] Review Request: Fuse emulator utilities In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191707.k3JH7RRR021067@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Fuse emulator utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167364 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:07:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:07:50 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177211] Review Request: newsx - NNTP news exchange utility In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191707.k3JH7ola021180@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: newsx - NNTP news exchange utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177211 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:08:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:08:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 174289] LibHdate is a small C, C++ library for Hebrew calendar and dates, holidays, and reading sequence. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191708.k3JH83J1021289@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: LibHdate is a small C,C++ library for Hebrew calendar and dates, holidays, and reading sequence. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174289 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:08:15 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:08:15 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175278] Review Request: gift-gnutella: gnutella plugin for giFT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191708.k3JH8FhS021348@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gift-gnutella: gnutella plugin for giFT https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175278 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:08:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:08:48 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177113] Review Request: geda-gnetlist - netlist generator for gEDA circuit design software In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191708.k3JH8mtl021586@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geda-gnetlist - netlist generator for gEDA circuit design software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177113 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:09:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:09:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178360] Review Request: xmms-adplug In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191709.k3JH9L62021716@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xmms-adplug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178360 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:10:14 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:10:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 173722] Review Request: stratagus - Real-time strategy gaming engine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191710.k3JHAEts021858@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: stratagus - Real-time strategy gaming engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173722 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:10:27 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:10:27 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177249] Review Request: jrtplib In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191710.k3JHARHC021917@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jrtplib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177249 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:10:50 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:10:50 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176580] Review Request: x11-ssh-askpass -- the cool brother of gnome-ssh-askpass In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191710.k3JHAo9v022040@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: x11-ssh-askpass -- the cool brother of gnome-ssh-askpass https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176580 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:12:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:12:06 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176374] Review Request: nagios-plugins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191712.k3JHC61v022416@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nagios-plugins https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176374 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:12:28 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:12:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177860] Review Request: libXvMCW - A Wrapper for run-time loading of XvMC libraries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191712.k3JHCShm022477@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libXvMCW - A Wrapper for run-time loading of XvMC libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177860 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:12:52 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:12:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177841] Tracker: New Extras packages that need a sponsor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191712.k3JHCqu8022603@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Tracker: New Extras packages that need a sponsor Alias: FE-NEEDSPONSOR https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:13:06 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:13:06 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177104] Review Request: abook - Text-based addressbook program for mutt In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191713.k3JHD6io022675@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: abook - Text-based addressbook program for mutt https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177104 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:13:45 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:13:45 -0400 Subject: [Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191713.k3JHDjj2023015@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:14:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:14:11 -0400 Subject: [Bug 169169] Review Request: JACAL: an interactive symbolic mathematics program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191714.k3JHEBnS023218@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: JACAL: an interactive symbolic mathematics program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169169 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:14:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:14:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177232] Review Request: regionset - reads/sets the region code of DVD drives In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191714.k3JHEIlF023255@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: regionset - reads/sets the region code of DVD drives https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177232 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:14:33 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:14:33 -0400 Subject: [Bug 174021] Review Request: aplus-fsf - Advanced APL Interpreter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191714.k3JHEXxt023319@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: aplus-fsf - Advanced APL Interpreter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174021 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:15:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:15:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177082] Review Request: wm-icons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191715.k3JHF09Q023492@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wm-icons https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177082 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:15:22 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:15:22 -0400 Subject: [Bug 173724] Review Request: libyahoo2 - Library for the Yahoo! Messenger Protocol In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191715.k3JHFMWf023541@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libyahoo2 - Library for the Yahoo! Messenger Protocol https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173724 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:15:44 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:15:44 -0400 Subject: [Bug 175502] Review Request: perl-Gtk2-Spell In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191715.k3JHFi37023629@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Gtk2-Spell https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175502 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:16:07 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:16:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177828] Review Request: python-libtidy - Python bindings for libtidy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191716.k3JHG781023740@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-libtidy - Python bindings for libtidy https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177828 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:16:29 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:16:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176109] Review Request: pytraffic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191716.k3JHGTwi023823@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pytraffic https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176109 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:17:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:17:02 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177415] Review Request: geda-docs - documentation for gEDA project In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191717.k3JHH2B6024071@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geda-docs - documentation for gEDA project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177415 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:17:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:17:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177865] Review Request: adplay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191717.k3JHHad3024185@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: adplay https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177865 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:17:59 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:17:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177115] Review Request: geda-utils - utilities for gEDA circuit design software In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191717.k3JHHxYM024328@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geda-utils - utilities for gEDA circuit design software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177115 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:18:43 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:18:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177080] Review Request: metisse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191718.k3JHIhRw024568@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: metisse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177080 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:19:00 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:19:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 176253] Review Request: clement-2.1 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191719.k3JHJ0pl024687@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: clement-2.1 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176253 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:19:34 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:19:34 -0400 Subject: [Bug 168310] Review Request: swish-e In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191719.k3JHJYZL024886@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: swish-e https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168310 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:19:57 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:19:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 177413] Review Request: geda-gattrib - attribute editor for gEDA project In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191719.k3JHJvnl025009@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: geda-gattrib - attribute editor for gEDA project https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177413 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|dkl at redhat.com |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From wtogami at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 17:37:10 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:37:10 -0400 Subject: Sorry! Message-ID: <44467546.40302@redhat.com> Sorry about that flood of bug spam. I didn't realize it would be numbering in the hundreds. At least this should be the end of the transition to fedora-package-review list. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Wed Apr 19 17:41:12 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 19:41:12 +0200 Subject: Seeking new maintainer for apt and synaptic In-Reply-To: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> References: <20060411190136.GE17716@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <20060419174112.GB18497@neu.nirvana> Hi, On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 09:01:36PM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > apt/synaptic have been orphaned since about half a year, anyone > objecting in me taking over? since there wasn't anyone objecting (on the matter of maintainership) I did take over on Monday evening after waiting for 6 days. I hope that time span was enough. Just making sure, because there was just a private complaint about me having done a silent take-over, while I did follow wikis, old maintainers'/sponsors'/upstream authors' direction in doing so and added some extras caution to it ... -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From aly.dharshi at telus.net Wed Apr 19 18:31:42 2006 From: aly.dharshi at telus.net (Aly Dharshi) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:31:42 -0600 Subject: Sorry! In-Reply-To: <44467546.40302@redhat.com> References: <44467546.40302@redhat.com> Message-ID: <4446820E.4060102@telus.net> I didn't mind it at all, kept me up2date in a sense as to the going ons. ASD. Warren Togami wrote: > Sorry about that flood of bug spam. I didn't realize it would be > numbering in the hundreds. At least this should be the end of the > transition to fedora-package-review list. > > Warren Togami > wtogami at redhat.com > -- Aly S.P Dharshi aly.dharshi at telus.net "A good speech is like a good dress that's short enough to be interesting and long enough to cover the subject" From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 19 18:40:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:40:48 -0400 Subject: [Bug 172803] Review Request: openssl097f - compat package to help transitioning to new openssl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604191840.k3JIemsV016869@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: openssl097f - compat package to help transitioning to new openssl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172803 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From hpa at zytor.com 2006-04-19 14:40 EST ------- Please put openssl097f into FE if not into FC. Not having forward binary compatibility from FC4 to FC5 is a major headache. See bug 188098. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 19 18:54:10 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:54:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060419185410.9693D8008@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 2 perl-MIME-tools-5.420-1.fc3 torque-2.1.0p0-0.7.200604171430cvs.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 19 18:55:17 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:55:17 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060419185517.896C38008@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 19 SOAPpy-0.11.6-2.fc4 abcm2ps-4.12.14-1.fc4 gdesklets-0.35.3-8.1.fc4 gphpedit-0.9.80-4.fc4 libmal-0.31-3.fc4 paraview-2.4.3-5.fc4 perl-HTML-Template-Expr-0.07-1.fc4 perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple-0.12-2.fc4 perl-MIME-tools-5.420-1.fc4 perl-Module-Load-0.10-1.fc4 perl-Module-Load-Conditional-0.08-1.fc4 perl-Module-Loaded-0.01-1.fc4 perl-Module-Pluggable-2.97-1.fc4 perl-Params-Check-0.24-1.fc4 smb4k-0.6.10-1.fc4 torque-2.1.0p0-0.7.200604171430cvs.fc4 trac-0.9.5-1.fc4 wxGTK-2.6.3-2.6.3.2.1.fc4 wxPython-2.6.3.2-1.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 19 18:56:33 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:56:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060419185633.E34648008@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 29 SOAPpy-0.11.6-2.fc5 abcm2ps-4.12.14-1.fc5 dogtail-0.5.1-3.fc5 ecore-0.9.9.026-1.fc5 edb-1.0.5.007-1.fc5 eet-0.9.10.026-1.fc5 embryo-0.9.1.026-1.fc5 evas-0.9.9.026-1.fc5 firestarter-1.0.3-11.fc5 gdesklets-0.35.3-8.fc5 gkrellmms-2.1.22-6.fc5 gphpedit-0.9.80-4.fc5 ikvm-0.22-5.fc5 jed-0.99.18-0.fc5 libmal-0.31-3.fc5 paraview-2.4.3-6.fc5 perl-HTML-Template-Expr-0.07-1.fc5 perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple-0.12-2.fc5 perl-MIME-tools-5.420-1.fc5 perl-Module-Load-0.10-1.fc5 perl-Module-Load-Conditional-0.08-1.fc5 perl-Module-Loaded-0.01-1.fc5 perl-Module-Pluggable-2.97-1.fc5 perl-Params-Check-0.24-1.fc5 pyspi-0.5.4-2.fc5 smb4k-0.6.10-1.fc5 torque-2.1.0p0-0.7.200604171430cvs.fc5 trac-0.9.5-1.fc5 xdesktopwaves-1.3-7.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 19 19:09:23 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 15:09:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060419190923.D77EB8008@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 28 SOAPpy-0.11.6-2.fc6 abcm2ps-4.12.14-1.fc6 apt-0.5.15lorg3-0.3.rc2.fc6 clamav-0.88.1-1.fc6 ecore-0.9.9.026-1.fc6 eet-0.9.10.026-1.fc6 embryo-0.9.1.026-1.fc6 evas-0.9.9.026-1.fc6 firestarter-1.0.3-10.fc6 gajim-0.10-0.1.pre2.fc6 gdesklets-0.35.3-8.fc6 gkrellmms-2.1.22-7.fc6 ikvm-0.22-5.fc6 jed-0.99.18-1 libmal-0.31-3.fc6 pan-0.93-1.fc6 paraview-2.4.3-6.fc6 perl-Crypt-Primes-0.50-1.fc6 perl-Crypt-RSA-1.57-2.fc6 perl-Crypt-Random-1.25-1.fc6 perl-HTML-Template-Expr-0.07-1.fc6 perl-MIME-tools-5.420-1.fc6 perl-Math-Pari-2.010704-2.fc6 perl-Net-SSH-Perl-1.30-1.fc6 python-protocols-1.0-0.1.a0dev_r2082.fc6 smb4k-0.6.10-1.fc6 torque-2.1.0p0-0.7.200604171430cvs.fc6 trac-0.9.5-1.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From pertusus at free.fr Wed Apr 19 21:25:56 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 23:25:56 +0200 Subject: rpms/compat-wxPythonGTK2/devel compat-wxPython.spec,1.2,1.3 In-Reply-To: <200604192106.k3JL64Yq002380@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200604192106.k3JL64Yq002380@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060419212555.GB2394@free.fr> > +BuildRequires: python-devel, mesa-libGLU-devel Maybe libGLU-devel would be better, unless it really requires the mesa implementation. -- Pat From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 19 21:44:00 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 21:44:00 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-19 Message-ID: <20060419214400.3447.91002@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: pyxdg From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 19 21:44:06 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 21:44:06 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-19 Message-ID: <20060419214406.3451.76874@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 19 21:44:13 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 21:44:13 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-19 Message-ID: <20060419214413.3454.18442@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 19 21:44:22 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 21:44:22 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-19 Message-ID: <20060419214422.3457.45318@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 Macaulay2-doc 0.9.2-22.fc6.i386 Macaulay2-emacs 0.9.2-17.fc4.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 ikvm-devel 0.22-4.fc5.i386 smart 0.41-30.fc6.i386 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc Macaulay2-doc 0.9.2-22.fc6.ppc Macaulay2-emacs 0.9.2-17.fc4.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc ikvm-devel 0.22-4.fc5.ppc smart 0.41-30.fc6.ppc sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 ikvm-devel 0.22-4.fc5.x86_64 smart 0.41-30.fc6.x86_64 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== New report for: paul AT all-the-johnsons.co.uk package: ikvm-devel - 0.22-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: ikvm = 0:0.22-4.fc5 package: ikvm-devel - 0.22-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: ikvm = 0:0.22-4.fc5 package: ikvm-devel - 0.22-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: ikvm = 0:0.22-4.fc5 ====================================================================== New report for: tcallawa AT redhat.com package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0()(64bit) libglade gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 ====================================================================== New report for: matthias AT rpmforge.net package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 ====================================================================== package: Macaulay2-emacs - 0.9.2-17.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: Macaulay2-doc - 0.9.2-22.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libobby-0.3.so.0 libnet6-1.2.so.0 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libobby-0.3.so.0()(64bit) package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: Macaulay2-emacs - 0.9.2-17.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: Macaulay2-doc - 0.9.2-22.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: Macaulay2 = 0:0.9.2 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libobby-0.3.so.0 libnet6-1.2.so.0 From peter at thecodergeek.com Wed Apr 19 21:52:11 2006 From: peter at thecodergeek.com (Peter Gordon) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:52:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: owners owners.list,1.861,1.862 In-Reply-To: <200604192129.k3JLTFhW002976@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200604192129.k3JLTFhW002976@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <33147.127.0.0.1.1145483531.squirrel@www.thecodergeek.com> Patrice Dumas said: > Log Message: > add archmage > [...] > +Fedora Extras|archmod|Extensible reader/decompiler of files in CHM format|pertusus at free.fr|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| Shouldn't that "archmod" be "archmage" then? There seems to be a slight discrepancy there. :P -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) This message was sent through a webmail interface, and thus not signed. From pertusus at free.fr Wed Apr 19 22:01:21 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 00:01:21 +0200 Subject: owners owners.list,1.861,1.862 In-Reply-To: <33147.127.0.0.1.1145483531.squirrel@www.thecodergeek.com> References: <200604192129.k3JLTFhW002976@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <33147.127.0.0.1.1145483531.squirrel@www.thecodergeek.com> Message-ID: <20060419220121.GC2394@free.fr> On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 02:52:11PM -0700, Peter Gordon wrote: > Patrice Dumas said: > > Log Message: > > add archmage > > [...] > > +Fedora Extras|archmod|Extensible reader/decompiler of files in CHM > format|pertusus at free.fr|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| > > Shouldn't that "archmod" be "archmage" then? > There seems to be a slight discrepancy there. :P Thank, corrected! -- Pat From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 20 00:03:47 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 02:03:47 +0200 Subject: mono/mock issue In-Reply-To: <442A7C41.3080107@city-fan.org> References: <442A7C41.3080107@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <20060420020347.9e25b7d3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 13:23:29 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > Whilst in the process of reviewing "lat" (#177580), I've created a > modified spec file that brings the package up to the latest release > version and addresses a number of review issues. It builds OK for me on > my FC5 desktop but I can't get it to build in mock. The following rather > cryptic error message appears: > > Making install in gnome-keyring-glue > make[1]: Entering directory > `/builddir/build/BUILD/lat-1.0.3/gnome-keyring-glue' > /usr/bin/mcs -unsafe -target:library -out:gnome-keyring-glue.dll > ./Attribute.cs ./AttributeType.cs ./Found.cs ./Global.cs > ./GnomeKeyringSharp.OperationGetIntCallbackNative.cs > ./GnomeKeyringSharp.OperationGetListCallbackNative.cs ./ItemType.cs > ./NetworkPasswordData.cs ./OperationGetIntCallback.cs > ./OperationGetListCallback.cs ./Result.cs > -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/pango-sharp.dll > -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/atk-sharp.dll > -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/gdk-sharp.dll > -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/gtk-sharp.dll > -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/glib-sharp.dll > -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/gnome-sharp.dll > -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/art-sharp.dll > -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/gnome-vfs-sharp.dll > -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/gconf-sharp.dll > -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/gconf-sharp-peditors.dll > -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/glade-sharp.dll > mono: mono-codeman.c:257: new_codechunk: Assertion `!err' failed. > make[1]: *** [gnome-keyring-glue.dll] Aborted > make[1]: Leaving directory > `/builddir/build/BUILD/lat-1.0.3/gnome-keyring-glue' Are there any noticable differences between the native FC5 build log and the mock build log? > Spec file attached. %defattr(..) is missing, btw From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 20 00:04:28 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 20:04:28 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060420000428.5AD1F8008@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 2 lincity-ng-1.0.3-1.fc3 wine-0.9.12-1.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 20 00:08:27 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 20:08:27 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060420000827.7ECAA8008@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 4 compat-wxPythonGTK2-2.4.2.4-10.fc4 lincity-ng-1.0.3-1.fc4 multitail-4.0.3-1.fc4 wine-0.9.12-1.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 20 00:11:38 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 20:11:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060420001138.7A14D8008@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 7 compat-wxPythonGTK2-2.4.2.4-11.fc5 gpsd-2.32-5.fc5 lincity-ng-1.0.3-1.fc5 multitail-4.0.3-1.fc5 python-sqlite2-2.2.1-1.fc5 python-sqlite2-2.2.2-1.fc5 wine-0.9.12-1.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 20 00:14:39 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 20:14:39 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060420001439.4C0688008@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 12 archmage-0.0.7-1.fc6 compat-wxPythonGTK2-2.4.2.4-11.fc6 gpsd-2.32-5.fc6 lincity-ng-1.0.3-1.fc6 multitail-4.0.3-1.fc6 octave-2.9.5-5.fc6 octave-forge-2006.03.17-2.fc6 perl-Error-0.15008-1.fc6 python-sqlite2-2.2.1-1.fc6 python-sqlite2-2.2.2-1.fc6 wine-0.9.12-1.fc6 xdesktopwaves-1.3-7.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From giallu at gmail.com Thu Apr 20 07:00:43 2006 From: giallu at gmail.com (Gianluca Sforna) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 09:00:43 +0200 Subject: Sorry! In-Reply-To: <44467546.40302@redhat.com> References: <44467546.40302@redhat.com> Message-ID: On 4/19/06, Warren Togami wrote: > Sorry about that flood of bug spam. I didn't realize it would be > numbering in the hundreds. At least this should be the end of the > transition to fedora-package-review list. > np. On a side note, will the fedora-package-review list be also available in gmane? I think many could appreciate that. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 20 11:17:18 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 07:17:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179852] FC4 buildsys fails - FC4 mock succeeds - wine-docs package In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604201117.k3KBHIDT026125@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: FC4 buildsys fails - FC4 mock succeeds - wine-docs package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179852 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com bugs.michael at gmx.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|/dev/std* missing in mock - |FC4 buildsys fails - FC4 |FE buildsystem |mock succeeds - wine-docs | |package -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 20 11:50:07 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 11:50:07 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-20 Message-ID: <20060420115007.5248.52716@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch ====================================================================== New report for: andreas.bierfert AT lowlatency.de package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: pyxdg ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 20 11:50:14 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 11:50:14 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-20 Message-ID: <20060420115014.5251.63370@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 20 11:50:21 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 11:50:21 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-20 Message-ID: <20060420115021.5255.41548@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 20 11:50:28 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 11:50:28 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-20 Message-ID: <20060420115028.5258.66456@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 smart 0.41-30.fc6.i386 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc smart 0.41-30.fc6.ppc sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 smart 0.41-30.fc6.x86_64 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libobby-0.3.so.0 libnet6-1.2.so.0 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0()(64bit) libglade gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libobby-0.3.so.0()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: smart - 0.41-30.fc6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: fedora-package-config-smart package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libobby-0.3.so.0 libnet6-1.2.so.0 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 From paul at city-fan.org Thu Apr 20 14:35:37 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 15:35:37 +0100 Subject: mono/mock issue In-Reply-To: <20060420020347.9e25b7d3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <442A7C41.3080107@city-fan.org> <20060420020347.9e25b7d3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <44479C39.4020607@city-fan.org> Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 13:23:29 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > >> Whilst in the process of reviewing "lat" (#177580), I've created a >> modified spec file that brings the package up to the latest release >> version and addresses a number of review issues. It builds OK for me on >> my FC5 desktop but I can't get it to build in mock. The following rather >> cryptic error message appears: >> >> Making install in gnome-keyring-glue >> make[1]: Entering directory >> `/builddir/build/BUILD/lat-1.0.3/gnome-keyring-glue' >> /usr/bin/mcs -unsafe -target:library -out:gnome-keyring-glue.dll >> ./Attribute.cs ./AttributeType.cs ./Found.cs ./Global.cs >> ./GnomeKeyringSharp.OperationGetIntCallbackNative.cs >> ./GnomeKeyringSharp.OperationGetListCallbackNative.cs ./ItemType.cs >> ./NetworkPasswordData.cs ./OperationGetIntCallback.cs >> ./OperationGetListCallback.cs ./Result.cs >> -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/pango-sharp.dll >> -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/atk-sharp.dll >> -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/gdk-sharp.dll >> -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/gtk-sharp.dll >> -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/glib-sharp.dll >> -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/gnome-sharp.dll >> -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/art-sharp.dll >> -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/gnome-vfs-sharp.dll >> -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/gconf-sharp.dll >> -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/gconf-sharp-peditors.dll >> -r:/usr/lib/pkgconfig/../../lib/mono/gtk-sharp-2.0/glade-sharp.dll >> mono: mono-codeman.c:257: new_codechunk: Assertion `!err' failed. >> make[1]: *** [gnome-keyring-glue.dll] Aborted >> make[1]: Leaving directory >> `/builddir/build/BUILD/lat-1.0.3/gnome-keyring-glue' > > Are there any noticable differences between the native FC5 build log and > the mock build log? It turns out that this was an SELinux issue. Mono normally runs in its own domain, mono_t, which can do execmem and execheap. Under mock, the domain transition to mono_t doesn't happen and so it runs in unconfined_t and breaks with an execheap violation. I've fixed this by writing a policy module for mock and running mock in its own domain, mock_t, rather than turning on the allow_execheap and allow_execmem booleans. > %defattr(..) is missing, btw Good spot, thanks. Paul. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 20 16:18:17 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 12:18:17 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060420161817.03D5D7FD1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 1 git-1.3.0-1.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 20 16:19:49 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 12:19:49 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060420161949.4A8517FD1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 8 fedora-package-config-smart-4-4 git-1.3.0-1.fc4 perl-Crypt-Primes-0.50-1.fc4 perl-Crypt-RSA-1.57-2.fc4 perl-Crypt-Random-1.25-1.fc4 perl-Math-Pari-2.010704-2.fc4 perl-Net-SSH-Perl-1.30-1.fc4 smart-0.41-31.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 20 16:20:34 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 12:20:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060420162034.159A47FD1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 8 fedora-package-config-smart-5-5 git-1.3.0-1.fc5 perl-Crypt-Primes-0.50-1.fc5 perl-Crypt-RSA-1.57-2.fc5 perl-Crypt-Random-1.25-1.fc5 perl-Math-Pari-2.010704-2.fc5.1 perl-Net-SSH-Perl-1.30-1.fc5 smart-0.41-31.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Apr 20 16:21:57 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 12:21:57 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060420162157.43EE37FD1@extras64.linux.duke.edu> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 5 fedora-package-config-smart-5.89-6 git-1.3.0-1.fc6 libstatgrab-0.13-1.fc6 perl-Class-Autouse-1.26-1.fc6 smart-0.41-31.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From jpo at lsd.di.uminho.pt Thu Apr 20 16:47:29 2006 From: jpo at lsd.di.uminho.pt (Jose Pedro Oliveira) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 17:47:29 +0100 Subject: rpms/perl-String-CRC32/FC-4 perl-String-CRC32.spec, 1.2, 1.3 sources, 1.2, 1.3 .cvsignore, 1.2, 1.3 In-Reply-To: <200604201628.k3KGS3OV016859@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200604201628.k3KGS3OV016859@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <4447BB21.1010607@lsd.di.uminho.pt> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Paul, Please don't built this until it gets updated for FC-5 as an Errata. jpo Paul Howarth (pghmcfc) wrote: > Author: pghmcfc > > Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-String-CRC32/FC-4 > In directory cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv16837 > > Modified Files: > perl-String-CRC32.spec sources .cvsignore > Log Message: > Update to 1.4 > > > > Index: perl-String-CRC32.spec > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-String-CRC32/FC-4/perl-String-CRC32.spec,v > retrieving revision 1.2 > retrieving revision 1.3 > diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 > --- perl-String-CRC32.spec 6 Jan 2006 17:52:11 -0000 1.2 > +++ perl-String-CRC32.spec 20 Apr 2006 16:28:00 -0000 1.3 > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > Summary: Perl interface for cyclic redundancy check generation > Name: perl-String-CRC32 > -Version: 1.3 > +Version: 1.4 > Release: 1%{?dist} > License: Public Domain > Group: Development/Libraries > @@ -43,5 +43,8 @@ > %{_mandir}/man3/String::CRC32.3pm* > > %changelog > +* Thu Apr 20 2006 Paul Howarth 1.4-1 > +- Update to 1.4 > + > * Fri Nov 25 2005 Paul Howarth 1.3-1 > - Initial build > > > Index: sources > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-String-CRC32/FC-4/sources,v > retrieving revision 1.2 > retrieving revision 1.3 > diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 > --- sources 6 Jan 2006 17:42:49 -0000 1.2 > +++ sources 20 Apr 2006 16:28:00 -0000 1.3 > @@ -1 +1 @@ > -7683cd1b183a6af807f20ee5fd076d0b String-CRC32-1.3.tar.gz > +9b241bc4a482a3aa59fbb1429bc30546 String-CRC32-1.4.tar.gz > > > Index: .cvsignore > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-String-CRC32/FC-4/.cvsignore,v > retrieving revision 1.2 > retrieving revision 1.3 > diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 > --- .cvsignore 6 Jan 2006 17:42:49 -0000 1.2 > +++ .cvsignore 20 Apr 2006 16:28:00 -0000 1.3 > @@ -1 +1 @@ > -String-CRC32-1.3.tar.gz > +String-CRC32-1.4.tar.gz > - -- Jos? Pedro Oliveira * mailto: jpo at di.uminho.pt * http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo * * gpg fingerprint = F9B6 8D87 859D 1C94 48F0 84C0 9749 9EB5 91BD 851B * -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFER7shl0metZG9hRsRAgWSAJ9TdMBiKr3oA6eqOvvVoHezUa/xtwCfdjcS p5PxRsNSGhTO73mJFWIrYx0= =REqw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 4616 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From paul at city-fan.org Thu Apr 20 16:49:28 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 17:49:28 +0100 Subject: rpms/perl-String-CRC32/FC-4 perl-String-CRC32.spec, 1.2, 1.3 sources, 1.2, 1.3 .cvsignore, 1.2, 1.3 In-Reply-To: <4447BB21.1010607@lsd.di.uminho.pt> References: <200604201628.k3KGS3OV016859@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <4447BB21.1010607@lsd.di.uminho.pt> Message-ID: <4447BB98.6020406@city-fan.org> Jose Pedro Oliveira wrote: > Please don't built this until it gets updated for FC-5 as an Errata. I know; I'm trying to raise an enhancement request on bugzilla but I keep getting Internal Server errors when submitting. Paul. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 20 21:16:36 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 21:16:36 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-20 Message-ID: <20060420211636.9649.25477@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 20 21:16:40 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 21:16:40 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-20 Message-ID: <20060420211640.9652.57952@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 20 21:16:43 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 21:16:43 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-20 Message-ID: <20060420211643.9653.18555@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 20 21:16:46 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 21:16:46 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-20 Message-ID: <20060420211646.9655.51284@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libobby-0.3.so.0 libnet6-1.2.so.0 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libobby-0.3.so.0()(64bit) package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0()(64bit) libglade gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libobby-0.3.so.0 libnet6-1.2.so.0 From kaboom at oobleck.net Thu Apr 20 21:07:50 2006 From: kaboom at oobleck.net (Chris Ricker) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 17:07:50 -0400 (EDT) Subject: RRDtool is in need of attention In-Reply-To: <20060412.144249.891065190.kevin@scrye.com> References: <20060412181252.4f388242@python2> <20060412.144249.891065190.kevin@scrye.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Chris> Looks like cacti and munin are the two packages already in > Chris> Extras which use it. Do they both work with 1.2? > > I think munin does. I haven't tested it, but from what I have read, it > should work with it fine. I can try and test it out at some point > here. If you can make a 1.2.x rrdtool test package that would be > helpfull. ;) I just updated devel CVS to 1.2. You can check that out and build it to get something to test with Note that I didn't request it built for devel -- figured I'd wait until hearing if it works for munin first, then try to deal with the php issues, clean it up, etc later, chris From tla-ml at rasmil.dk Fri Apr 21 11:02:49 2006 From: tla-ml at rasmil.dk (Tim Lauridsen) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 13:02:49 +0200 Subject: Buildsystem problem ?? Message-ID: <4448BBD9.5060205@rasmil.dk> I the the buildsystem down ??? I get this error, when requesting a build. *[tim at localhost FC-5]$ make plague /usr/bin/plague-client build yumex yumex-0_99_17-1_0_fc5 fc5 Error connecting to build server: 'timed out' make: *** [plague] Error 1 * Tim -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Fri Apr 21 11:49:12 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 07:49:12 -0400 Subject: Buildsystem problem ?? In-Reply-To: <4448BBD9.5060205@rasmil.dk> References: <4448BBD9.5060205@rasmil.dk> Message-ID: <1145620152.7813.8.camel@cutter> On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 13:02 +0200, Tim Lauridsen wrote: > I the the buildsystem down ??? > I get this error, when requesting a build. > > [tim at localhost FC-5]$ make plague > /usr/bin/plague-client build yumex yumex-0_99_17-1_0_fc5 fc5 > Error connecting to build server: 'timed out' > make: *** [plague] Error 1 Yes. -sv From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 21 12:18:56 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 14:18:56 +0200 Subject: up-imapproxy (Re: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-20) In-Reply-To: <20060420211643.9653.18555@faldor.intranet> References: <20060420211643.9653.18555@faldor.intranet> Message-ID: <20060421141856.0417fc40.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 21:16:43 -0000, Michael Schwendt wrote: > Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 > > Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc > > Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 > > > ====================================================================== > package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 > unresolved deps: > libssl.so.5 > libcrypto.so.5 > > package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 > unresolved deps: > libssl.so.5()(64bit) > libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) > > package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc > unresolved deps: > libssl.so.5 > libcrypto.so.5 This is in bugzilla as https://bugzilla.redhat.com/185729 (and in the tracker bugs, too) but the package maintainer has not responded in over a month. The mails sent privately have not bounced. As soon as the buildsys server is reachable again, the packages will be removed from the repository, since they are broken anyway. Does it make sense to keep the fc4 packages? (I don't think so) From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Apr 21 12:32:54 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 14:32:54 +0200 Subject: up-imapproxy (Re: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-20) In-Reply-To: <20060421141856.0417fc40.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060420211643.9653.18555@faldor.intranet> <20060421141856.0417fc40.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1145622775.21836.53.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Freitag, den 21.04.2006, 14:18 +0200 schrieb Michael Schwendt: > On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 21:16:43 -0000, Michael Schwendt wrote: > This is in bugzilla as > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/185729 (and in the tracker bugs, too) > > but the package maintainer has not responded in over a month. He responded to me once in private; I forwarded it privately to a potential maintainer. > As soon as the buildsys server is reachable > again, the packages will be removed from the repository, since they are broken > anyway. Agreed > Does it make sense to keep the fc4 packages? (I don't think so) Why do you think so? I vote for leaving it around in FC4 (but if there are good reasons to remove it from FC4 I'm fine with removing it). CU thl From paul at city-fan.org Fri Apr 21 12:36:05 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 13:36:05 +0100 Subject: up-imapproxy (Re: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-20) In-Reply-To: <20060421141856.0417fc40.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060420211643.9653.18555@faldor.intranet> <20060421141856.0417fc40.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <4448D1B5.2040507@city-fan.org> Michael Schwendt wrote: > This is in bugzilla as > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/185729 (and in the tracker bugs, too) > > but the package maintainer has not responded in over a month. The mails > sent privately have not bounced. As soon as the buildsys server is reachable > again, the packages will be removed from the repository, since they are broken > anyway. Does it make sense to keep the fc4 packages? (I don't think so) There is a maintainer (David Rees) willing to take over this package, who wanted to orphan it some time ago but was persuaded to hang on a little while. I think it's time for the takeover now. http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg02001.html https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187186 Paul. From ed at eh3.com Fri Apr 21 16:45:43 2006 From: ed at eh3.com (Ed Hill) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 12:45:43 -0400 Subject: failed cvs-import.sh -- what next? Message-ID: <1145637943.18414.345.camel@ernie> Hi folks, I reviewed the wifiroamd package submission and, after talking with the submitter, have agreed to help him by importing it into CVS (until he gets the paperwork done, etc.). So, I ran the "./common/cvs-import.sh ${SRPM}" script and it didn't complete. It died part-way through with the error message: Checking : wifiroamd-1.05.tar.gz on https://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/repo/extras/upload.cgi... ERROR: could not check remote file status make: *** [upload] Error 255 ERROR: Uploading the source tarballs failed! I presume this means my client cert has expired (as others mentioned) so I got a new client cert and... what next? Should I re-run the cvs-import.sh script or will the cvs bits require some manual clean-up or...? Ed -- Edward H. Hill III, PhD office: MIT Dept. of EAPS; Rm 54-1424; 77 Massachusetts Ave. Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 emails: eh3 at mit.edu ed at eh3.com URLs: http://web.mit.edu/eh3/ http://eh3.com/ phone: 617-253-0098 fax: 617-253-4464 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 21 16:48:18 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 18:48:18 +0200 Subject: up-imapproxy (Re: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-20) In-Reply-To: <1145622775.21836.53.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <20060420211643.9653.18555@faldor.intranet> <20060421141856.0417fc40.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145622775.21836.53.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <20060421184818.5a1da8e8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 14:32:54 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > This is in bugzilla as > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/185729 (and in the tracker bugs, too) > > > > but the package maintainer has not responded in over a month. > > He responded to me once in private; I forwarded it privately to a > potential maintainer. > > > As soon as the buildsys server is reachable > > again, the packages will be removed from the repository, since they are broken > > anyway. > > Agreed > > > Does it make sense to keep the fc4 packages? (I don't think so) > > Why do you think so? > > I vote for leaving it around in FC4 (but if there are good reasons to > remove it from FC4 I'm fine with removing it). The broken FC4->FC5 upgrade path is a good reason to remove it from all branches. And some day we'll need a solution for orphans anyway. Btw, the broken deps report is incomplete. An update of repoclosure is needed to make it look at only the newest packages for dependencies. It didn't catch the pilot-link ABI downgrade, because the old package is still in the repositories - http://bugzilla.redhat.com/189585 From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Apr 21 17:31:54 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 19:31:54 +0200 Subject: Summary from the FESCo-Meeting on April 13 Message-ID: <1145640715.2331.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sorry, didn't find time earlier to write the summary from last weeks meeting. Find it below and in the wiki at http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SteeringCommittee/Meeting-20060413 == Summary == Present from FESCo: thl, mschwendt, f13, scop, skvidal, thomasvs, warren * kernel module standardization * some minor adjustments are needed -- thl will work further on them and post about it to the list * EOL Policy * Still undecided; we should continue to discuss this on the list; some people sill think that we should still allow new stuff in FC3; other say "maintenance mode now. No new packages, just fixes." Other ideas: Only new packages for FC3 if FESCo approves them. thl and warren want to avoid a "Fedora Legacy Team and the term in general. * Broken deps report * It can run on extras64 once it has been updated. Still undecided when to run ist -- after each push? In any case: The repo needs to be fully synced * No new sponsorship nominations * Build dependency exceptions (http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg01484.html) * A lot of opinions; See the full log for details * see the last sentence * let's go for the last sentence of http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg01484.html * Mailinglist for games SIG * warren created fedora-games-list == Full Log == {{{ 18:59 * | thl looks around 19:00 < thl> | Hi everyone; who's around for the FESCo Meeting? 19:00 --> | mschwendt (Michael Schwendt) has joined #fedora-extras 19:00 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCO Meeting in progress 19:00 --> | f13 (http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=jkeating) has joined #fedora-extras 19:00 * | scop is after 3 minutes 19:01 < thl> | okay, I'll start slowly 19:01 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCO Meeting in progress -- kernel module standarisation 19:01 < thl> | the proposal is used by another repo 19:01 < thl> | I notices some minor things there: 19:02 < thl> | the kernel pacakges in core are named 19:02 < thl> | kernel{,-variant}-foo 19:02 < thl> | e.g. 19:02 < thl> | kernel-smp-devel 19:02 < thl> | but kmods are named 19:02 < thl> | kmod-foo{,-variant} 19:02 < thl> | e.g. 19:02 < thl> | kmod-ndiswrapper-smp 19:03 < thl> | did that happen accidently? 19:03 < thl> | scop, ? 19:03 < scop> | apples and oranges? 19:03 < thl> | okay 19:03 < thl> | good answer 19:03 * | skvidal is around 19:03 < thl> | there is one other thing 19:04 < thl> | the kmods imho should provide something like 19:04 < thl> | kmod-foo-$(uname -r) 19:04 < thl> | or "kmod-foo-kerneldep = $(uname -r)" 19:04 < scop> | that needs to be arch-qualified too 19:04 < thl> | to allow installation via 19:05 < thl> | yum install 'kmod-foo-kerneldep = $(uname -r)' 19:05 < thl> | or something like that 19:05 < scop> | kmod-foo-%{__target_cpu} = $(uname -r) 19:05 < thl> | multiple people asked me for that 19:05 < thl> | scop, sounds okay for me 19:06 < thl> | that okay for everybody? 19:06 < thomasvs> | (I am here too) 19:06 < scop> | thl, did the folks asking it say a specific reason for the need? 19:06 < ignacio> | No variant in that? 19:06 < thl> | ignacio, variant is in the uname 19:06 < scop> | ignacio, good point, needs variant 19:07 < thomasvs> | btw, I do feel they should be named like kernel, it's already very confusing 19:07 < scop> | ....actually, it's in $(uname -r) 19:07 * | warren is here, but trying to do 2 meetings at once 19:07 < thl> | scop, to install a older version via yum 19:07 < thl> | peopel are still used to it from the old scheme 19:07 < thl> | and I think we should provide it 19:08 < thl> | anyway, let's proceed now 19:08 < scop> | wait, the conclusion was? 19:08 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting -- EOL Policy 19:08 < thl> | f13, mschwendt ? 19:09 < thl> | and of course everyone else :-) 19:09 < scop> | thl, please hold on, what was the conclusion of the previous item? 19:09 < thl> | scop, no one yet 19:09 < warren> | I'm OK with this, except I still want to add stuff that I use in FC3 Extras. =( 19:09 < thl> | I'll look into it closer and post for the list for opinion; sorry for being a bit hectic; but I think we have a lot todo today 19:10 < thl> | warren, "want to add stuff" -> new stuff? 19:10 < thl> | or updates to exisiting packages? 19:10 < warren> | stuff that isn't in Extras yet but I use on my servers, it has only been a time issue 19:10 < warren> | use on my servers for the forseeable future (forever), thus I have to maintain it 19:11 < thl> | opinions? 19:11 < mschwendt> | we should continue with this on the list -- why discuss this here? 19:11 < f13> | ah I'm here. 19:11 < thl> | We IMHO have to slow FC3 a bit down; no new packages would be a direct sign for everybody 19:12 < warren> | actually the list would be better, we're trying to do a simultaneous in-person "how do we merge core and extras" meeting here. 19:12 < thl> | mschwendt, can we move the discussion to a public list again? 19:12 < f13> | yes, but we still need to get this resolved. 19:12 < mschwendt> | thl: sure 19:12 < f13> | we go round arnd roun don teh list, never make a decision, chair it for a meeting, then at the meeting we just say discuss on list. 19:12 < f13> | whats the point? 19:12 < warren> | thl, if we had some way of saying "No new packages unless you can guarantee that you will maintain that package for 4 years." Would work for me personally, but enforcing that is the hard part. 19:12 < |Jef|> | warren: good luck 19:13 < mschwendt> | f13: what is your most recent proposal then? 19:13 < f13> | I personally see FC3 as maintenance mode now. No new packages, just fixes. 19:13 < scop> | f13++ 19:13 < f13> | mschwendt: Extras follows core. 19:13 < skvidal> | f13: +1 19:13 < thl> | I tend to agree with f13 19:13 < f13> | mschwendt: when core goes maint mode, as does extras. When Core gets dropped from Legacy, as it does from Extras. 19:14 < mschwendt> | and who is the FE Legacy team? 19:14 < f13> | mschwendt: there is none, that could be handled by the FE Security SIG 19:14 < warren> | naming a team and calling them legacy is a wrong idea 19:14 < f13> | indeed 19:14 < thl> | no "FE Legacy" please 19:14 < mschwendt> | and who does the FE Security SIG consist of? 19:14 < mschwendt> | just Hans, or? 19:14 < f13> | FE Security SIG would be committed to caring about security fixes as long as a release is at least in maint mode. After main tmode, boom. 19:15 < f13> | mschwendt: I'm on it, there are others. 19:15 < mschwendt> | so this will be a try-and-see thing -- okay 19:15 < f13> | mschwendt: we don't really have an official one because we haven't gotten official blessing from FESCO for a security policy to begin with. 19:15 < thl> | mschwendt, three people iirc 19:15 < f13> | we're getting to the point of chicken / egg. 19:15 < warren> | I'm OK with going ahead with this, but I don't want this to be 100% without flexibility. 19:15 < warren> | I'm still actively using FE3 in production. 19:16 < warren> | How about "No additions unless FESCO approves." ? 19:16 < mschwendt> | f13: we should still discuss how to mark packages as "package owner doesn't do updates anymore", so the legacy people don't conflict with changes done the package owner 19:16 < scop> | we don't need that on our TODO list 19:16 < warren> | Just make the red tape and bureaucracy needed so large that people wont do it. 19:16 < f13> | warren: yes, but you can't use your FESCO membership just to allow your package in. 19:16 < f13> | we REALLY REALLY shouldn't be adding new things to a dead release. 19:16 < warren> | f13, it isn't dead. 19:16 < f13> | mschwendt: thats for a different discussion, but sure. 19:17 < |Jef|> | f13: dead horses look brand new when you give them a new saddle 19:17 < f13> | warren: right, and 7.2 and 6.2 aren't dead, blah blah blah 19:17 < |Jef|> | f13: i think the term here is "undead" 19:18 < thl> | I don't like the "No additions unless FESCO approves." idea very much 19:18 * | XulChris screams I'm not dead yet! 19:18 < ignacio> | Just say it requires a majority vote from FESCO for adding new packages and be done with it. 19:18 < thl> | but I can live with it if the other like it 19:18 < |Jef|> | thl: afraid of fesco overload? 19:18 < f13> | we have to turn it off at some time. 19:18 < mschwendt> | time-killing discussion -- we should create a list of things we need to agree on and process that list item by item 19:19 < warren> | Back to the list please 19:19 * | f13 is now somewhat AFK 19:19 * | warren in the other meeting now 19:19 < thl> | okay, so who writes a summary and starts a discussion on extras-list? 19:19 < thl> | f13, mschwendt ? 19:19 < mschwendt> | I can do that 19:19 < thl> | mschwendt, thx 19:20 < thl> | okay, let's proceed then 19:20 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting -- Broken deps report 19:20 < thl> | mschwendt, your running the script more often now afaics 19:20 < mschwendt> | most recent version here: http://home.arcor.de/ms2002sep/tmp/repoclosure-modified-20060408.tgz 19:20 < thl> | what needs to be done to driver this forward? 19:21 < mschwendt> | all I've done is execute "rc-run-all.py", and let it do everything alone 19:21 < thl> | a fedoraproject machine to run it on? 19:21 < mschwendt> | somebody to install it, probably edit the included yum.conf to point it to "local" mirrors 19:21 < mschwendt> | and then we need a way to either run it periodically via cron or after a push 19:21 < scop> | how long does a run take? 19:21 < thl> | skvidal, do you have a machine for it? 19:22 < thl> | skvidal, I can ask Sopwith for one that could do that, too 19:22 < mschwendt> | scop: half an hour on a slow machine 19:23 < skvidal> | thl: it can run on extras64 once it has been updated 19:23 < thl> | could we run it after repo push? 19:23 < scop> | mschwendt, probably too much to be included in the push scripts then 19:23 < thl> | skvidal, k, great 19:23 <-- | warren has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 19:23 < mschwendt> | scop: why? the push script could run it via atd 19:23 < scop> | mschwendt, true 19:23 < mschwendt> | the script uses a lockfile, so it doesn't run more than once 19:24 < scop> | that'd work for me 19:24 < thl> | do we want to run after each push or every day at a specific time? 19:24 < mschwendt> | thl: repo integrity is important 19:25 < thl> | sure :-) 19:25 < thl> | so every day at a specific time? 19:25 < mschwendt> | I think you misunderstood me 19:25 < thl> | ? 19:25 < scop> | clearly after each push IMO 19:25 < mschwendt> | the script needs a fully synced repository, so it doesn't fail downloading broken metadata 19:26 < scop> | so add it as the last item of extras-push-all (after the rsync), running against the private buildsys repo copy, via atd? 19:26 < mschwendt> | when running at an arbitrary time, it may be confronted with an incompletely sync repo 19:26 < mschwendt> | s/sync/synced/ 19:27 < thl> | okay; well let's handle the details via mail 19:27 < thl> | skvidal, what's the status of extras64 update 19:27 < skvidal> | two items outstanding 19:28 < skvidal> | 1. coordinating with dcbw so we'll be around at the same time 19:28 < skvidal> | 2. making sure the two bugs outstanding in mock are fixed before pushing out a new mock release 19:28 < skvidal> | dcbw is out of the area, iirc, for this weekend so it won't happen then 19:28 < skvidal> | and the mock stuff I hope to close out tomorrow 19:29 < thl> | okay; then we'll revisit this item after the update is done 19:29 < skvidal> | okie doke 19:29 < thl> | okay for everybody 19:29 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting -- Weekly sponsorship nomination 19:29 < thl> | anyone? 19:30 < skvidal> | doesn't sound like it 19:31 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting -- Security Proposal 19:31 < thl> | mschwendt, f13 ? 19:32 < mschwendt> | not my item, sorry 19:33 <-- | M0ppi has quit ("Segmentation fault") 19:33 < thl> | mschwendt, sorry, I got the impression that you were interested in it 19:33 --> | warren (Unknown) has joined #fedora-extras 19:33 < thl> | well, I'll try to start a discussion on fedora-extras-list for that 19:33 < thl> | then we really should look at it at the next meeting 19:34 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting -- Build dependency exceptions 19:34 < thl> | spot's item 19:34 < thl> | does anyone know the details? scop? 19:34 < skvidal> | what's this about? 19:34 < mschwendt> | it's about BuildRequires python perl gcc-c++ and so on 19:34 < scop> | frequently reoccurring topic about "forbidden" build dependencies 19:34 < mschwendt> | they should not block a package from being approved 19:35 < skvidal> | 'forbidden'? 19:35 < mschwendt> | the reviewing guidelines say they MUST NOT be put into a spec file 19:35 < scop> | http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg01484.html 19:35 < scop> | see the last paragraph 19:35 < mschwendt> | that should become a SHOULD NOT -- with a bit of added common sense 19:35 < skvidal> | ah 19:35 < skvidal> | sorry 19:36 < mschwendt> | packagers doing BR gcc-c++ only make it complicated to build this package with a different gcc (e.g. gcc42-c++) 19:36 --> | Eitch (Hugo Cisneiros) has joined #fedora-extras 19:36 < scop> | shrug, those need to be parallel installable anyway 19:36 --> | Sopwith (Elliot Lee) has joined #fedora-extras 19:36 < mschwendt> | scop: why enforce a specific compiler package name? 19:36 <-- | Sopwith has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 19:37 < thomasvs> | if libtool wasn't so silly to put in *hard requirements* on gcc-c++ and fortran we probably wouldn't be having this problem 19:37 < scop> | mschwendt, to stop confused packagers bringing up the silly topic over and over again? 19:37 <-- | giallu has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 19:37 < mschwendt> | scop: do you want to see BR make sed grep tar bzip2? 19:37 < mschwendt> | BR rpm rpm-build? 19:37 < thomasvs> | mschwendt: no, those are already required by rpmbuild 19:37 < scop> | mschwendt, are you serious? 19:38 < thomasvs> | mschwendt: the core of the argument is that there are some people that feel that you shouldn't automatically assume *any* programming language, except maybe C 19:38 < scop> | you said "common sense", and "should not block" 19:38 < mschwendt> | then why do we have a minimal build environment? 19:38 < thomasvs> | gcc-c++ for one thing pulls in quite a bit more, and also has ABI problems between versions 19:39 < thomasvs> | mschwendt: I have no idea why people feel gcc-c++ should be in that minimal env, and e.g. python shouldn't 19:39 < mschwendt> | gcc-c++ _is_ in there 19:39 < thomasvs> | mschwendt: yes, in what extras considers minimal. 19:39 < mschwendt> | Core has even more stuff in there 19:39 < thomasvs> | I have never heard a good reason why though, except that a lot of configure scripts break because libtool puts in a really stupid macro 19:40 < scop> | also, the buildsys and the documented minimal env are not in sync 19:40 < thomasvs> | given the relatively few number of c++ packages, I still don't see why it's part of minimal :) 19:40 * | thl still wonders why autofoo is installed by default in the buildsys 19:41 < thomasvs> | but I'm looking forward to putting mono and java in as part of the minimal buildreqs! 19:41 < thomasvs> | thl: I see no need for that either 19:41 < mschwendt> | so, what do we discuss? that packagers should be permitted to add arbitrary BR? 19:41 < thomasvs> | mschwendt: I think anything not pulled in by rpm-build should be ok to add 19:42 < thomasvs> | I don't see where else to sensibly draw the line 19:42 < scop> | rpm-build pulls in perl, for very questionable reasons 19:42 < scop> | BR perl is what ignites these discussions most of the time 19:42 < thomasvs> | scop: yep, that's too bad, but if that's the practical situation ... 19:42 < thomasvs> | (can someone verify for me that the minimal env also pulls in a fortran compiler ?) 19:43 < thomasvs> | (and can someone mention any fortran code we ship ?) 19:43 < scop> | please stop the noise 19:43 <-- | jcollie has quit ("Leaving") 19:43 < mschwendt> | thomasvs: do you refer to direct requirements of rpm-build or recursive dependencies? ;) 19:43 < thl> | well, can somebody work out a proposal/solution for the problem? 19:43 < thomasvs> | mschwendt: recursive. "yum install rpm-build" -> everything available then is fine IMO 19:44 < mschwendt> | thomasvs: then we need a new ExceptionList again 19:44 < scop> | getting off topic. do we have forbidden build dependencies or not? 19:45 < scop> | whatever they are 19:45 < mschwendt> | common sense should suffice -- where it doesn't, everything is lost anyway 19:45 * | thl repeats: can somebody work out a proposal/solution for the problem? 19:46 < thl> | seems we are stucked atm 19:46 * | scop repeats: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg01484.html 19:46 < scop> | see the last sentence 19:46 < scop> | (the "I'd have" part) 19:47 < thl> | hmm; that would allow "BR: gcc" afaics 19:47 < thomasvs> | scop: I agree with that, I guess what's in the list is a separate point 19:47 < thl> | but yeah, it's okay 19:47 < thl> | I can live with that 19:47 < scop> | yes, and not scheduled for discussion today 19:47 < mschwendt> | packagers should think twice before adding unneeded BR, easy as that 19:48 < thl> | does anyone dislike the last sentence of http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg01484.html 19:48 < thl> | otherwise I suggest we go for that one for now 19:48 < thomasvs> | +1 19:48 <-- | Eitch has quit ("brb") 19:48 < mschwendt> | I think some reviewers also try to make packagers eliminate redundant recursive BR, so this entire topic is a waste of time 19:49 < thl> | well, seems some people wat to discuss it 19:50 < thl> | so let's go for the last sentence of http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg01484.html 19:50 < thl> | scop, can you change it in the wiki please? 19:50 < scop> | will do 19:50 < thl> | scop, thx 19:50 < XulChris> | that was easy ;-) 19:50 < thl> | okay, moving on 19:50 < thl> | does anyone want to discuss and other items from the schedule? 19:51 * | thl needs to leave soon 19:51 < XulChris> | any news on a games sig list? 19:51 < thl> | XulChris, warren had planed to create it iirc 19:52 < thl> | just fyi: the games SIG want's a separate mailinglist 19:52 < thl> | that okay for everyone? 19:52 < warren> | XulChris, list is created, will give it to you soon 19:52 < XulChris> | what would it be called? 19:52 < warren> | fedora-games-list 19:52 < XulChris> | fedora-sig-games? 19:52 < _wart_> | warren: Woohoo! thanks! 19:52 < XulChris> | ok cool 19:52 < warren> | it isn't setup yet 19:52 < warren> | give me 30 minutes 19:52 < thl> | k, anything else? 19:53 * | thl will close the meeting in 60 19:53 < thl> | anyone interested to write the summary for the list? 19:53 * | thl will close the meeting in 30 19:53 * | thl will close the meeting in 15 19:53 * | thl will close the meeting in 10 19:54 < thl> | MARK: Meeting end 19:54 < thl> | thx everyone 19:54 < thl> | cu next week }}} -- Thorsten Leemhuis From katzj at redhat.com Fri Apr 21 17:40:33 2006 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 13:40:33 -0400 Subject: failed cvs-import.sh -- what next? In-Reply-To: <1145637943.18414.345.camel@ernie> References: <1145637943.18414.345.camel@ernie> Message-ID: <1145641234.28718.1.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 12:45 -0400, Ed Hill wrote: > I presume this means my client cert has expired (as others mentioned) so > I got a new client cert and... what next? Should I re-run the > cvs-import.sh script or will the cvs bits require some manual clean-up > or...? You should just be able to re-run the script. Jeremy From drees76 at gmail.com Fri Apr 21 17:55:50 2006 From: drees76 at gmail.com (David Rees) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 10:55:50 -0700 Subject: up-imapproxy (Re: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-20) In-Reply-To: <1145622775.21836.53.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <20060420211643.9653.18555@faldor.intranet> <20060421141856.0417fc40.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145622775.21836.53.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <72dbd3150604211055o213fad61t60c9ed7b068ce2c9@mail.gmail.com> On 4/21/06, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Freitag, den 21.04.2006, 14:18 +0200 schrieb Michael Schwendt: > > On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 21:16:43 -0000, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > This is in bugzilla as > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/185729 (and in the tracker bugs, too) > > > > but the package maintainer has not responded in over a month. > > He responded to me once in private; I forwarded it privately to a > potential maintainer. I sent him (jeff at ultimateevil.org) an email at the beginning of April and he said he was going to work on getting his dev environment back up so he could work on it, but never heard back. I sent another email early this week, still nothing. I'm willing to take over maintainership and will work on getting the package ready this weekend. > > Does it make sense to keep the fc4 packages? (I don't think so) > > Why do you think so? > > I vote for leaving it around in FC4 (but if there are good reasons to > remove it from FC4 I'm fine with removing it). The FC4 packages are fine, I don't see the point in removing them until FC4 support ends. -Dave From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Apr 21 18:10:08 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 20:10:08 +0200 Subject: Summary from this week's FESCo Meeting Message-ID: <1145643009.2331.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> Also in the wiki at http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SteeringCommittee/Meeting-20060420 == Summary == Present from FESCo: thl, scop, jpo, jeremy, skvidal, warren, f13, Anvil * Weekly sponsorship nomination * Nominated and accepted: "Hans de Goede" and bpepple * FESCo future * See full log if you are interested in all the details. thl will prepare a mail with a summary and a proposal how to proceed over the weekend * Security SIG * a lot of discussion; some parts: * f13 > | there is a proposal there, linked in the schedule, and I"d like to know whats blocking this? * warren> | I want small tweaks to it before it is approved. * thl > | we really should get to an agreement next week * EOL for Fedora Extras * thl and warren mention again that they don't like the "Fedora Extras Legacy" approach * thl> will try try to work something out together with f13 and post it to the list * Some discussion about "Core packages reviews" * a "Fedora Packaging Committee" seems likely * jeremy> | bpepple: and if you notice ones [pacakges] that don't meet the guidelines yet still get approved, let me know == Full Log == {{{ 18:57 --> | scop (Ville Skytt??) has joined #fedora-extras 18:59 < thl> | hello everyone 18:59 < jpo> | hi 19:00 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress 19:00 < thl> | who's around? 19:00 * | jeremy is, at least somewhat 19:00 < thl> | well, let's start slowly 19:01 --> | jnettlet_ (Jon Nettleton) has joined #fedora-extras 19:01 < thl> | First: Sorry, I didn't write the summary for the last meeting yet 19:01 < thl> | I'll hope to do that tomorrow 19:01 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress -- Kernel module standardization 19:02 < thl> | nothing new there, skipping 19:02 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress -- EOL Policy for FE 19:02 < thl> | does anyone want to say anything on that topic? 19:02 < thl> | or do we simply discuss this further on the list? 19:02 * | bpepple doesn't have anything to say. 19:03 < |Jef|> | thl: i take you you'd like to have competent constructive comments 19:03 < thl> | well, maybe I should say something: 19:03 < thl> | I don't like the idea of a "Fedora Extras Legacy" 19:03 < thl> | I'd like to avoid the term 19:04 < thl> | and a special group that handles older distros 19:04 < thl> | |Jef|, if you have constructive comments shoot 19:05 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress -- Broken deps report 19:05 < thl> | skipping 19:05 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress -- Security Proposal 19:05 < thl> | skipping, too -- no news this week on that iirc 19:06 < thl> | I hope to find time on the weekend to write a mail to the list with details how to prceed 19:06 < thl> | proceed 19:06 < skvidal> | thl: I can't make it to the meeting today 19:06 < skvidal> | right now the buildsys is down for an upgrade 19:06 < skvidal> | it took a while 19:06 < |Jef|> | thl: no i have no constructive comments... just general doomsaying 19:07 < thl> | skvidal, k, thx; have fun with the buildsys ;-) 19:07 < skvidal> | thanks 19:07 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress -- Weekly sponsorship nomination 19:07 < thl> | I'd like to nominate "Hans de Goede" 19:08 < warren> | I second that nomination. 19:08 < bpepple> | +1 19:08 < thl> | scop, ? 19:08 < scop> | +1 19:09 < thl> | k, thx 19:09 < thl> | I'll upgrade him 19:09 < thl> | okay 19:09 < thl> | that were all "Priority 1" items 19:09 < jeremy> | I have a nomination too 19:10 < thl> | does anyone want to discuss any other items 19:10 * | thl waits for jeremy 19:10 < jeremy> | bpepple 19:10 < jwb> | +1 19:10 < jwb> | (from the rif-raf) 19:10 * | warren takes a quick look at activity... 19:10 < scop> | no objections here 19:11 < warren> | bpepple, what is your e-mail address that you use on lists? 19:11 < bpepple> | bdpepple at ameritech.net 19:11 < warren> | is that also your bugzilla? 19:11 * | thl thought bpepple had sponsor status already 19:12 < bpepple> | warren: yup. 19:12 < jwb> | thl, which is all the more reason :) 19:12 < jeremy> | thl: not according to the account system (I was wondering after seeing a number of good reviews, so went to check :) 19:12 < warren> | OK, I like what I see. 19:12 < warren> | +1 19:13 < jwb> | side note... 19:13 < jwb> | should all the FESCO members have sponsor auth? 19:13 < warren> | jwb, no 19:13 * | jwb is puzzled by this 19:13 < warren> | at least historically no 19:13 < bpepple> | jwb: Not all FESCO members have contributed packages, and done reviews. 19:13 < warren> | we had some FESCO members who didn't do anything in extras, strangely 19:13 < thl> | okay, I'll upgrade bpepple to sponsor status 19:13 < warren> | but I think they melted away 19:14 < jwb> | bpepple, not contributing packages shouldn't be a hurdle 19:14 < jwb> | reviews... ok maybe 19:14 < bpepple> | jwb: Yeah, the reviewing is the bigger issue. 19:14 < warren> | If you're doing good reviews consistently, then you deserve sponsor status. 19:14 < jwb> | i just find it strange that members of FESCO are trustworthy enough to steer extras in general, but not sponsor others 19:15 < warren> | jwb, some of the original members of FESCO I didn't think belonged there, but that is a different story. 19:15 < jwb> | warren, sure. that's a different issue though 19:15 < warren> | I don't even know who is in FESCO anymore. 19:15 < warren> | FESCO is so transparent. 19:16 < jwb> | is the list on the wiki up to date? 19:16 < warren> | I don't know 19:16 * | warren looks 19:16 < thl> | it is update afaik 19:16 < warren> | URL? 19:16 < thl> | but this brings me to a important item in any case 19:16 < thl> | warren, http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SteeringCommittee 19:16 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo Meeting in progress -- FESCo future 19:17 < jwb> | my question is prompted by f13's recent situation 19:17 < thl> | we need to discuss how to proceed with FESCo 19:17 < warren> | jwb, which situation is that? 19:17 < jwb> | warren, he was doing reviews and went to sponsor someone but couldn't 19:17 < thl> | there are some FESCO members that wanted to leave 19:17 < warren> | Yeah, then just remove them? 19:18 < thl> | we discussed about that on the FESCo list already 19:18 < warren> | jwb, in f13's case, I think he deserves sponsor status for several reasons 19:18 < jwb> | warren, so do i. and he has it now. but i just generalized the question 19:18 < thl> | and get a rotation for FESCo 19:18 < warren> | thl, ++ 19:18 < jwb> | thl, yes 19:19 < thl> | the question is: how to do it exactly 19:19 < warren> | Did Anvil want to remain in? 19:19 < jwb> | perhaps by starting with a limit on the number of poeple? 19:19 < warren> | I think we should have people that 1) show up for meetings 2) are active leaders in Extras. 19:19 < Anvil> | remain in what ? 19:19 < thl> | a election after a self nomination for FESCo membership 19:19 < jwb> | Anvil, FESCO 19:19 < warren> | Anvil, do you want to remain in fesco? 19:19 < Anvil> | FESCO. Nah. 19:19 < Anvil> | warren : i'm of no use. 19:19 < Anvil> | honest. 19:19 < warren> | Anvil, you're plenty useful. 19:19 < Anvil> | warren : no way. 19:19 < warren> | (Just not for FESCO.) 19:20 < jwb> | thl, election by whom? 19:20 < Anvil> | even outside of fesco i have doubts 19:20 < warren> | Anvil, wink wink, nudge nudge 19:20 < Anvil> | jwb : from current fesco members maybe. 19:20 < jwb> | yeah, that's what i was thinking 19:20 < Anvil> | warren : I'm lost. What's that ? 19:20 < bpepple> | Anvil: sounds like a good idea. 19:20 < thl> | jwb, by all Extras packagers 19:21 < jwb> | thl, omg 19:21 < thl> | jwb, just a idea 19:21 < thl> | jwb, any better ideas? 19:21 < warren> | How about appointment by the benevolent dictator thl? 19:21 < |Jef|> | thl: running large scale voting elections takes effort 19:21 < Anvil> | hmm actually do we have enough volunteers that we have to organize elections ? 19:21 < thl> | |Jef|, agreed 19:22 < warren> | I move that thl just chooses people to join. 19:22 < jwb> | thl, let those in FESCO that currently want to leave, leave. set a number for FESCO. if there are open spots, let people self nominate. then let FESCO elect 19:22 < Anvil> | thl |Jef| : extras packagers can *at least* make suggestions. 19:22 < |Jef|> | thl: and im more than running such an election..using closed software that i write to tally the voting results 19:23 < thl> | has anyone experiences with such votings? 19:23 < f13> | ooh fesco meeting,a nd I'm around! 19:23 < warren> | thl, first, who wanted to leave FESCO? 19:23 < thl> | debian does them now and then afaik 19:23 < f13> | warren: I expressed interest in leaving. 19:23 < |Jef|> | thl: anyone who has done gnome board elections... 19:23 < jwb> | thl, having a broader election isn't _bad_. it's just much harder to do, and sometimes people aren't really invovled enough to know 19:23 < Anvil> | arent we supposed to be based upon meritocraty and not democraty ? 19:24 < thl> | warren, at least Anvil, adriar, maybe Sopwith and f13 19:24 < warren> | Anvil, ++ 19:24 < Anvil> | who are the more meriteful ? 19:24 < |Jef|> | Anvil: lets vote to figure that out! 19:24 < Anvil> | |Jef| :) 19:24 < warren> | So we're losing Anvil, adrian, Sopwith, bytee, gregdek, f13 ? 19:24 < |Jef|> | hahahaha 19:24 < Anvil> | warren : the end of an epoch ? 19:25 < warren> | I think merit is a good measure of who belongs in FESCO. 19:25 * | Anvil propose Axel for his own replacement. 19:25 < f13> | um. 19:25 < |Jef|> | warren: is that like 2/3s of the fesco? 19:25 < jwb> | |Jef|, it's a lot. yeah 19:25 < f13> | I"d rather see Axel do a few more packages before we start asking him how to run Extras. 19:25 < |Jef|> | jwb: thats not good 19:25 < warren> | f13, ++ 19:25 < jwb> | no, it isn't 19:25 < Anvil> | f13 : hasnt he the merit to be considered as a fork ? Isnt that enough ? 19:26 < f13> | here's the thing, FESCO as it is has existed for a while. 19:26 < |Jef|> | jwb: you want a continuation of culture not upheavals 19:26 < warren> | 6 of 17 current members are leaving 19:26 < f13> | it's about time for fresh members/minds. 19:26 < |Jef|> | f13: sure fresh members.. not 2/3 fresh members though 19:26 < thl> | f13, agreed 19:26 < jwb> | who thinks 17 members is too many? 19:26 < warren> | I think 15 is reasonable 19:26 < Anvil> | jwb : _o/ 19:26 < warren> | 6 leaving, 4 new 19:26 < scop> | I'd go for something like 9 19:26 < |Jef|> | warren: i like to think of committees as a group of people who have to decide on a place to eat dinner together 19:26 < thl> | I'd go for 13 19:26 < bpepple> | warren: That doesn't seem bad. 19:27 < |Jef|> | warren: 15 people deciding where to eat... never works 19:27 < jwb> | i was thinking 10, but i don't count 19:27 < ignacio> | 9 or 11 seems good to me. 19:27 < warren> | |Jef|, yeah, you need to wait much longer for a table to open. 19:27 < thl> | jwb, every opinions counts 19:27 < jwb> | :) 19:27 < ignacio> | Even numbers are bad. 19:27 < f13> | indeed 19:27 < |Jef|> | warren: or just decidingwhere to go.. is a huge pain in the ass...with 15 19:27 < jwb> | ah good point about even numbers 19:27 < warren> | Well think about it this way 19:27 < Anvil> | do we agree it has to be a prime number ? \-) 19:27 < jwb> | then i say 11 19:27 < warren> | how many members actually show up to meetings? 19:27 < warren> | Having some redundancy in there might make sense for us. 19:28 < thl> | warren, not enough currently 19:28 < warren> | thus a higher number makes sense for FESCO 19:28 < thl> | there are some members that I've never seen here 19:28 < thl> | warren, agreed 19:28 < warren> | 17 currently, I think 15 is reasonable 19:28 < |Jef|> | thl: or its an indication that the wrong people are on the committee 19:28 < warren> | but if we have 6 clear leaders to replace the 6 leaving, then we shouldn't deny them. 19:28 * | thl is fine with 15 19:28 < warren> | because maybe they will show up at meetings =) 19:28 < jwb> | warren, a higher number, or people that actually want to be there? 19:28 < ignacio> | The number can be cut down further as time goes on. 19:29 < warren> | jwb, people that actually want to be there. 19:29 < jwb> | yeah 19:29 < warren> | Requirements: 1) Leadership 2) Want to do it 3) Merit 19:29 < ignacio> | But for now it's best to rotate in some new members. 19:29 < |Jef|> | thl: think about a meeting quorum 19:29 < jwb> | yes 19:29 < thl> | Requirements: 4) take a open task and improve extras 19:30 < thl> | e.g. a self nominations to the list 19:30 < jwb> | thl, doesn't that fall into 3? 19:30 < thl> | jwb, maybe, but I wanted to make it explicit 19:30 < warren> | jwb, yeah 19:30 < warren> | oh 19:30 < jwb> | thl, so someone has to take a todo from the FESCO list and make it happen _before_ they are on FESCO? 19:30 < warren> | OK, while we're here. I nominate jwb and ignacio. 19:30 < thl> | I'd like to hear from each new member what his plans are for the next year 19:31 < thl> | jwb, no 19:31 < thl> | jwb, just laying down the plans and ideas for the future 19:31 < jwb> | hm, ok 19:31 < thl> | and at least plan to work on them after beeing in FESCo 19:31 * | warren wonders why FESCO membership is required for working on TODO items. 19:32 * | scop seconds 19:32 < thl> | warren, everyone can work on the todo items 19:32 < Anvil> | one good point for warren. 19:32 < |Jef|> | warren: other way around 19:32 < jwb> | warren, i'm not saying it is. just that some of those items might be harder to acheive 19:32 < |Jef|> | warren: if you get suckered into fesco membership you have to work on something :- 19:32 < thl> | but IMHO every FESCo member should work on at least one of the todo items 19:32 < jwb> | thl, ++ 19:32 < warren> | There may be other obvious people here right now, but names escape my mind at the moment. I will read through review traffic in the last few weeks to see other obvious candidates. 19:33 < thl> | I really would like a self nomination periode 19:33 < thl> | where people can lay down their ideas for the future of Extras 19:34 * | thl waits for other ideas 19:35 < warren> | thl's approach is fine. 19:35 < warren> | Just do it. 19:35 < jwb> | i like that. it should (hopefully) show that they really want to be there and are motivated to improve things 19:35 < bpepple> | sounds good. 19:35 < thl> | k 19:35 < warren> | When people ask me "create this mailing list" I ask them to write a mission statement, goals, objectives, etc. 19:35 < thl> | I'll write a main on that topic to fedora-extras-list this weekend 19:35 < warren> | Sometimes they never respond, meaning they weren't serious about it. 19:35 < thl> | we should discuss this there a bit more 19:36 < warren> | If people want to join FESCO, they should write their own mission statement, goals, objectives, etc. 19:36 < thl> | and then we can proceed with a actual plan next week 19:36 < warren> | thl, ok 19:36 < thl> | that okay for everybody? 19:36 < jwb> | i think it's important to allow others to make suggestions, but the potential candidates still have to do the explaining thing 19:36 < f13> | worksforme 19:36 < warren> | One more aspect of FESCO membership that I would like to clarify. 19:36 < thl> | jwb, k 19:36 < warren> | What if members haven't had "merit" but they don't want to leave FESCO? 19:37 < warren> | (They don't actually do anything.) 19:37 < thl> | warren, good question 19:37 < warren> | I personally think the merit requirement is important. 19:38 < thl> | if they not even do the "lay down the plans for the near extras future" and the "self nominations" 19:38 < thl> | that it might be the right time to give that position to somebody else 19:38 < jwb> | ask them to leave, or explain why they should stay 19:39 < warren> | We're not comfortable booting people? =) 19:39 < jwb> | warren, that depends on their explanation :) 19:39 < bpepple> | How about FESCO membership for a specific timeframe with elections every year or so? 19:39 <-- | uwog has quit ("I like core dumps") 19:39 < thl> | jwb, yeah, "ask them to leave, or explain why they should stay" sounds like a good idea, too 19:39 < jwb> | FESCO isn't life membership. it's up for review 19:40 < warren> | It really isn't hard to get into FESCo if we have these requirements. There are only so many leaders. 19:40 < skvidal> | if anyone wants to get rid of me, I'm fine with that 19:40 --> | uwog (Marc Maurer) has joined #fedora-extras 19:40 < jwb> | bpepple, if we have some kind of staging in there, sure. we want to avoid doing a total refresh every year though 19:40 < warren> | If we get to a point where there are 100 people who are leaders and only 15 spots, then having the overhead of elections might be worth it. 19:40 < warren> | But I don't think that is necessary now. 19:41 < jwb> | right 19:41 < scop> | skvidal, not that I would want that per se, but being both in fesco and the board sounds somewhat unnecessary to me... 19:41 < thl> | btw, there should also be a discussion how the chair of fesco is choosen 19:41 < warren> | hot potato? =) 19:41 < warren> | "I don't want it, you take it." 19:41 < jwb> | thl, choosen by peers. as you were 19:41 < skvidal> | scop: I'm fine with leaving it 19:41 < jwb> | thl, with that person obviously wanting the job :) 19:42 < warren> | 7 leaving, 5 new? 19:42 < skvidal> | scop: especially if other people want to do more 19:42 < warren> | I think we have a few good people to choose from for 5 new. 19:42 < thl> | warren, please don't count 19:42 < skvidal> | scop: I don't want to be in the way 19:42 < thl> | let's wait who nominates himself for the job 19:42 < warren> | This is fine. Let's move on. 19:43 < thl> | k 19:43 < jwb> | thl, in your email could you outline what it entails to be on FESCO? time requirements, etc? 19:43 < thl> | jwb, I'll try 19:43 < jwb> | all i can ask :) 19:43 < warren> | Not necessarily time, but the dedication and merit. 19:43 < jwb> | warren, sure that too 19:43 < skvidal> | time is the big factor 19:43 < skvidal> | most people want to help 19:44 < skvidal> | sometimes they just don't have enough time to make it useful 19:44 < jwb> | right 19:44 * | warren brb 19:44 < thl> | the problem we have afaics is 19:44 < thl> | that a lot of people often expect help from fesco 19:44 < thl> | but they don't get any hints or help on fedora 19:45 < thl> | that why the EOL and the Security SIG are stuckked a bit ATM 19:45 < thl> | (afaics) 19:45 < thl> | we need to improve that in the future 19:45 < thl> | anyway, let's proceed with other things 19:45 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- free discussion related to fedora extras 19:46 < thl> | any other important things that need to be discussed? 19:46 < f13> | thl: I wasn't aroudn to talk about the Security thing last week 19:46 < f13> | can we bring it up now? 19:46 < bpepple> | Could we talk about Core packages reviews for a bit? 19:46 < f13> | also the EOL stuff I thought an email was going to go out for more discussion, but I neer saw anything. So yet another week we've let this languish. 19:46 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- f13 -- Security 19:46 < thl> | f13, the floor is yours 19:47 < thl> | f13, just FYI, I don#t like the Fedora Extras Legacy idea 19:47 < thl> | we should avoid the term 19:47 < f13> | Honestly, there is a proposal there, linked in the schedule, and I"d like to know whats blocking this? 19:47 <-- | has quit (Remote closed the connection) 19:47 < f13> | thl: 'Extras Legacy'? where do you see that anywhere? 19:47 < thl> | f13, you mean EOL or Security SIG? 19:47 < warren> | "Extras Legacy" is the wrong approach to this 19:47 < f13> | I could have sworn all the references were Maintenance. 19:47 < thl> | f13, mschendt proposed that on extras-list 19:48 < f13> | thl: currently lets talk baout the Security SIG 19:48 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- f13 -- Security SIG 19:48 < warren> | We must have a Security team at the Fedora distribution level that tracks issues. Then security team + other people can work on the tracked issues. 19:49 < thl> | I'm fine with the proposal the Security SIG wrote 19:49 < warren> | URL? 19:49 < f13> | warren: it's linked in the schedule. 19:50 < thl> | warren, http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/SecurityPolicy 19:50 < thl> | I still wondering if we should split the Security SIG 19:50 < f13> | split? 19:50 < thl> | into a group that watches bugtrack and other mailinglist 19:50 < thl> | and a group that fixes things that need fixing 19:50 < warren> | Not necessarily 19:51 < f13> | thl: for the public lists not necessary 19:51 < thl> | warren, agreed 19:51 < warren> | I personally think the tracking part is the most important part of the security team. 19:51 < f13> | when we start talking embargo, then we do need a more limited view. 19:51 < thl> | warren, and we can do it later in any case if it becomes necessary 19:51 < jwb> | i hate embargo 19:51 < f13> | but thats for later. I'm trying to get the first part of the Policy in place, which we can grow from. 19:51 < warren> | Tracking is the main responsibility of security SIG. Then those members have the option of working on the issues, as does the package maintainers. 19:52 < f13> | Do we have quorem(sp?) of FESCO members to make this Policy approved, so that interested parties can start implimenting it? 19:52 * | f13 will leave time for more reading. 19:52 < warren> | I want small tweaks to it before it is approved. 19:52 < skvidal> | f13: quorum 19:52 < f13> | warren: what tweaks? 19:53 < warren> | f13, not exactly sure yet, I want to read this current version. 19:54 < thl> | I'm fine with waiting another week with a final discussion 19:54 < f13> | warren: it hasn't changed in over a week, did you not read it last week? 19:54 < thl> | but we really should get to an agreement next week 19:55 < warren> | agreed, by next week 19:55 < f13> | ok, moving on to EOL policy? 19:55 <-- | cweyl has left #fedora-extras ( ) 19:55 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- f13 -- EOL 19:55 < f13> | Extras should track Core. Go into Maint mode when Core does, and really EOL when Core does. 19:55 <-- | giallu has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 19:55 < bpepple> | f13: +1 19:55 < jwb> | +1 19:55 < warren> | No sense maintaing Extras if Core is retired. 19:56 --> | cweyl (Chris Weyl) has joined #fedora-extras 19:56 < f13> | Can we agree that Maint mode gets security fixes only? 19:56 < f13> | or other things approved by board, such as severe bugfixes? 19:56 < jwb> | f13, i think the latter is better 19:57 < warren> | I agree in principal about no new additions, but I am not 100% comfortable about making this completely inflexible. I hope we can have some exception process that is a huge pain in the ass, enough so that people are discouraged from doing it. 19:57 < thl> | f13, just to make sure: did you read the thread mschendt started last week on fedora-extras-list? 19:57 < thl> | f13, https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-April/msg00880.html 19:57 < f13> | hrm, he did it on Extras list. bummer, I wasn't on that list. 19:57 < warren> | I don't agree to security fix only. Often times it requires far less effort to upgrade versions. It should be treated on a case by case basis based on impact. 19:58 < f13> | warren: but the reason to update the package would be fore Security 19:58 < f13> | warren: I'm ok w/ upgrading the package to fix a security issue, but not with upgrading a package because a new wizbang package version came out. 19:59 < f13> | thl: that thread seems more like implimentation of the policy rather than Policy in general. 19:59 < warren> | I still think we shouldn't make policy completely inflexible. 19:59 < f13> | warren: how is this not inflexible? 19:59 < f13> | warren: updates/upgrades for security, or things approved by the board can happen until a true EOL 19:59 < warren> | There are cases that are not "security" in a traditional sense, but it just makes sense to upgrade it. 19:59 < f13> | after true EOL, nothing more. 19:59 --> | abadger1999 (Toshio Kuratomi) has joined #fedora-extras 20:00 < f13> | warren: the board can approve that. 20:00 < warren> | after a true EOL it just naturally makes sense to stop working on it. 20:00 < warren> | I have to go to my next meeting. 20:00 < warren> | I'll weigh in on list 20:00 < f13> | which list? 20:00 < warren> | fedora-extras-list 20:01 < f13> | can we keep it on fesco list? I'm ont on extras, and don't want to be. 20:01 < jwb> | f13, how about maintaines? 20:01 < jwb> | er, maintainers 20:01 < f13> | jwb: that works for me too 20:01 < f13> | can we set a hard mandate to resolve this by next week to? 20:01 < warren> | f13, well there is already a discussion on this very topic on extras-list, why not keep it there? 20:01 < jwb> | f13, fesco is closed and i can't read it and i'm selfish and want to know :) 20:01 < warren> | f13, we can try, but I wouldn't make guarantees. 20:01 < f13> | these are really the last two things I care about for Extras, and I"d REALLY like to get them off my plate. 20:02 < thl> | well, we're running late 20:02 < warren> | Quite frankly, I still am not fully comfortable with you trying to dictate Extras policy when you yourself were not an active contributor to Extras. 20:02 < f13> | warren: because A) that looked largely like an implementation discussion, not a policy discussion, B) a discussion on policy should have a narrower view, people doing rather than consuming. 20:02 < f13> | warren: I know, but given that there is NOBODY ELSE DOING IT means that I have to step in. 20:03 < thl> | f13, could you post a summary and a proposal to fedora-maintainers list 20:03 < thl> | so people can discuss 20:03 < thl> | and we agree on that one next week 20:03 < f13> | warren: because I CONTINUE to get questions bout why Legacy doesn't support Extras. 20:03 < jwb> | leadership vs. merit 20:03 < warren> | That is a good reason, we'll figure something out. 20:03 < jwb> | :) 20:03 < thl> | I don't like some of the ideas mschwendt proposed on extras-list 20:03 < warren> | Yes, i'm not comfortable with that either. 20:03 < f13> | I care about policy. How you guys impliment it is up to you. 20:03 < warren> | I think we're in agreement that Extras Legacy is not the direction we want to go? 20:04 < thl> | f13, I can write that mail if you don#t want to 20:04 < thl> | warren, yes 20:04 < warren> | I have to go 20:04 * | thl needs to leave soon, too 20:04 <-- | warren has quit ("Leaving") 20:04 < f13> | warren: right, the FEdora security SIG can step in and do things in absence of a maintainer or active maintainer, but I don't think it should be viewed as a dumping ground of old packages. 20:04 < f13> | an Extras maintainer should be under the understanding that if you want to maintain a package, you're in it for a full cycle. 20:05 < f13> | thats it for me. 20:05 < thl> | f13, define "full cycle" please 20:05 < thl> | full Core cycle as supported by red hat 20:05 < thl> | or by Fedora Legacy 20:05 < f13> | thl: If you introduce a package in FC4, you should be responsible for it until FC4 goes EOL 20:06 < f13> | thl: as by Legacy, as we're trying to blur the line between what "Red Hat' does and what "Fedora" does. 20:06 < thl> | f13, EOL by "Fedora Legacy"? 20:06 < f13> | thl: think of it as a cycle that "Fedora" does, which includes what RH contributes and Legacy contributes. 20:06 < f13> | thl: thats what makes sense to me. 20:06 < thl> | f13, I'll try to work something out 20:07 < thl> | and post it to you 20:07 < thl> | and afterwards to the list 20:07 < f13> | thl: especially given that Core ships w/ Legacy configs, and will soon ship w/ Legacy configs enabled. 20:07 < thl> | that okay? 20:07 < f13> | sounds fine by me. 20:07 < thl> | k 20:07 < f13> | thanks. 20:07 --> | warren (Unknown) has joined #fedora-extras 20:07 < thl> | bpepple> | Could we talk about Core packages reviews for a bit? 20:07 < f13> | I guess I should be around for that too (; 20:08 < bpepple> | Not really a Extras specific issue, but it's doesn't really seem clear to what standard these packages are being reviewed for? 20:08 < bpepple> | Are we using Extra guidelines? 20:09 < thl> | bpepple, currently yes 20:09 < f13> | bpepple: if you haven't noticed, I edited those policies so that they are FEdora standards. 20:09 < f13> | not Extras standards. 20:09 < thl> | bpepple, I think some detials still need to be worked out 20:09 < f13> | and yes, new core package reviews must adhere to these guidelines. 20:10 < thl> | maybe we need a "Fedora Packaging Committe" that handles the guidelines for both Core and Extras 20:10 < bpepple> | Some of the packages I've looked at seem to need a more formal approach to be approved. 20:10 < f13> | bpepple: there were only 4 core packages thus far. 20:10 < f13> | bpepple: and they were used as the test case to see where the policies needed adjustment and how the process works. 20:11 < f13> | thl: yes, I think a formal Packaging committee should be created. I'm pretty sure spot is in agreement too. 20:11 < bpepple> | Ok, maybe that's what I noticed. I glanced at gcalctools review, and there looked like some reluctance to follow the packing guidelines. 20:12 < thl> | I need to leave 20:12 < thl> | Is it okay for everyone if I close the meeting? 20:12 < f13> | bpepple: part of that is being the first to get reviewed. 20:12 < f13> | thl: yes. 20:12 * | thl fill close the meeting in 60 20:12 < f13> | bpepple: trust me, those of us that are approving packages, and are behidn this at Red Hat will ensure that shit gets done right. 20:12 * | thl fill close the meeting in 30 20:13 < bpepple> | f13: Ok, just verify how these should be handled. 20:13 < bpepple> | thanks. 20:13 * | thl fill close the meeting in 15 20:13 * | thl fill close the meeting in 10 20:13 < thl> | MARK: Meeting End! 20:13 < thl> | thx everyone 20:13 < jeremy> | bpepple: and if you notice ones that don't meet the guidelines yet still get approved, let me know 20:13 < f13> | bpepple: simple. If the package doesn't meet the guideline, don't accept it. IF it isn't on FC-ACCEPT, I'm not letting it into the distro. 20:13 <-- | jnettlet_ has left #fedora-extras ( "Leaving") 20:15 < bpepple> | whoops, I meant verifying, not verify. 20:16 < abadger1999> | f13: We don't require an Extras Maintainer to "support" on all architectures. But they do have to be willing to accept patches to fix problems on other archs. So in a sense they're just coordinators. What're your thoughts on the differences WRT maintaining packages on FC-releases you're not running? 20:17 < f13> | abadger1999: probably simiilar. The Security SIG is there as a fallback point, but shouldn't be dumped upon. THe maintainer should make a resonable effort to stick around for the lifespan. 20:17 < f13> | abadger1999: I don't want to see Extras (continue to) be a fire and forget repository 20:21 --> | BobJensen (Robert 'Bob' Jensen) has joined #Fedora-Extras 20:21 <-- | JSchmitt has quit (Remote closed the connection) 20:21 < abadger1999> | f13: I missed the first part of the EOL discussion -- is the proposed solution to fire-and-forget just that the maintainer pushes updates to older releases? 20:23 < abadger1999> | f13: It seems some of the hesitation to update less current FC stems from not being able to test there. 20:23 < f13> | abadger1999: its more of putting a policy in place where there is none. 20:23 < f13> | abadger1999: currently there is no policy, and thus no expectation on how long an Extras package will be valid. 20:24 < f13> | I'm interested in seeing a policy go in place regarding when things can be updated and such, but implimentation is largely up to Extras to decide. 20:26 < abadger1999> | f13: I see.. So any time period as long as it sets a definite expectation so responsibility for the remaining time period can be planned on by other projects/end-users? 20:26 < f13> | pretty much yes. 20:26 < f13> | and I'm recommending the timeline that follows Core as presented by Fedora. 20:26 < f13> | Active for a period of time, Maint for a period of time, then flat out EOL 20:28 <-- | scop has left #fedora-extras ( "Leaving") 20:29 < abadger1999> | f13: So a two part proposal: 1) There must be a definite timeline. 2) Timeline that follows Core makes sense (insert reasons here). 20:29 < f13> | yeah 20:29 < abadger1999> | f13: Thanks. I've got a better understanding now :-) }}} -- Thorsten Leemhuis From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Apr 21 18:50:49 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 14:50:49 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060421185049.CB1CA15212A@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 3 git-1.3.0-1.fc3 powermanga-0.80-2.fc3 torque-2.1.0p0-0.10.200604211036cvs.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From tibbs at math.uh.edu Fri Apr 21 19:22:44 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 14:22:44 -0500 Subject: Header files in Perl packages Message-ID: Some Perl packages install header files deep into the internal Perl directory hierarchy. I guess these are used for something internal to Perl. Some packages which do this are perl-PDL, Gtk-Perl, perl-DBI (and now perl-cairo, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187799). The packaging guidelines state: - MUST: Header files or static libraries must be in a -devel package. but it seems pointless to put two header files in a separate -devel package when they aren't intended to be included from user-written code. I suppose it's possible that Perl needs to have them present to run. Is this situation a valid exception to the above MUST? - J< From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 21 19:33:21 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 19:33:21 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-21 Message-ID: <20060421193321.4063.4349@faldor.intranet> [TEST] Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 grads 1.9b4-6.fc3.1.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 sqlite-tcl 2.8.16-1.i386 stripesnoop-devel 1.5-2.fc3.i386 [TEST] Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 sqlite-tcl 2.8.16-1.x86_64 stripesnoop-devel 1.5-2.fc3.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: sqlite-tcl - 2.8.16-1.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: sqlite = 0:2.8.16-1 package: stripesnoop-devel - 1.5-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: stripesnoop = 0:1.5-2.fc3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: grads - 1.9b4-6.fc3.1.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: libdap.so.3 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: stripesnoop-devel - 1.5-2.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: stripesnoop = 0:1.5-2.fc3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: sqlite-tcl - 2.8.16-1.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: sqlite = 0:2.8.16-1 package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 21 19:33:33 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 19:33:33 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-21 Message-ID: <20060421193333.4066.46334@faldor.intranet> [TEST] Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ikvm-devel 0.22-4.fc5.i386 libopensync-plugin-palm 0.18-3.fc5.i386 sylpheed-claws 2.1.0-1.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 [TEST] Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ikvm-devel 0.22-4.fc5.ppc libopensync-plugin-palm 0.18-3.fc5.ppc sylpheed-claws 2.1.0-1.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc [TEST] Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ikvm-devel 0.22-4.fc5.x86_64 libopensync-plugin-palm 0.18-3.fc5.x86_64 sylpheed-claws 2.1.0-1.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: libopensync-plugin-palm - 0.18-3.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: ikvm-devel - 0.22-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: ikvm = 0:0.22-4.fc5 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.1.0-1.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.1.0-1.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: ikvm-devel - 0.22-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: ikvm = 0:0.22-4.fc5 package: libopensync-plugin-palm - 0.18-3.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9()(64bit) package: libopensync-plugin-palm - 0.18-3.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.1.0-1.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: ikvm-devel - 0.22-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: ikvm = 0:0.22-4.fc5 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 21 19:33:27 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 19:33:27 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-21 Message-ID: <20060421193327.4065.15654@faldor.intranet> [TEST] Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- grads 1.9b4-7.fc4.1.i386 libopensync-plugin-palm 0.18-2.fc4.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.i386 wxGTK-stc 2.4.2-12.i386 wxGTK-xrc 2.4.2-12.i386 [TEST] Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- grads 1.9b4-7.fc4.1.ppc libopensync-plugin-palm 0.18-2.fc4.ppc plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.ppc wxGTK-stc 2.4.2-12.ppc wxGTK-xrc 2.4.2-12.ppc [TEST] Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- libopensync-plugin-palm 0.18-2.fc4.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.x86_64 wxGTK-stc 2.4.2-12.x86_64 wxGTK-xrc 2.4.2-12.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: wxGTK-stc - 2.4.2-12.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: wxGTK = 0:2.4.2-12 package: libopensync-plugin-palm - 0.18-2.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: grads - 1.9b4-7.fc4.1.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: libdap.so.3 package: wxGTK-xrc - 2.4.2-12.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: wxGTK = 0:2.4.2-12 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.0.0-3.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: wxGTK-stc - 2.4.2-12.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: wxGTK = 0:2.4.2-12 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.0.0-3.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9()(64bit) package: wxGTK-xrc - 2.4.2-12.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: wxGTK = 0:2.4.2-12 package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: libopensync-plugin-palm - 0.18-2.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9()(64bit) package: libopensync-plugin-palm - 0.18-2.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.0.0-3.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: wxGTK-xrc - 2.4.2-12.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: wxGTK = 0:2.4.2-12 package: wxGTK-stc - 2.4.2-12.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: wxGTK = 0:2.4.2-12 package: grads - 1.9b4-7.fc4.1.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: libdap.so.3 package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 21 19:33:49 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 19:33:49 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-21 Message-ID: <20060421193349.4068.8192@faldor.intranet> [TEST] Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 [TEST] Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc [TEST] Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libobby-0.3.so.0 libnet6-1.2.so.0 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0()(64bit) libglade gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libobby-0.3.so.0()(64bit) package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libssl.so.5()(64bit) libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libssl.so.5 libcrypto.so.5 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomesupport.so.0 libzvt.so.2 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libobby-0.3.so.0 libnet6-1.2.so.0 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libglade gnome-libs libart_lgpl.so.2 libglade.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libgnomesupport.so.0 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomeui.so.32 libgnome.so.32 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 21 20:07:30 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 22:07:30 +0200 Subject: Changes explained (was: Re: Summary - Broken dependencies...) In-Reply-To: <20060421193327.4065.15654@faldor.intranet> References: <20060421193327.4065.15654@faldor.intranet> Message-ID: <20060421220730.592f5516.bugs.michael@gmx.net> The upgraded script includes a slightly modified and newer repoclosure from yum-utils-0.5. The older one also looked at older dependencies and hence failed to catch some breakage: On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 19:33:27 -0000, Michael Schwendt wrote: > [TEST] Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > grads 1.9b4-7.fc4.1.i386 A nice catch actually. Version upgrade on March 3rd apparently broke the ABI (libdap.so.3 -> libdap.so.4). > libopensync-plugin-palm 0.18-2.fc4.i386 > sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.i386 pilot-link downgrade and ABI break > scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 > scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 Unsure. There's a newer scim-tables, but no newer ja/ko langpack. > wxGTK-stc 2.4.2-12.i386 > wxGTK-xrc 2.4.2-12.i386 Clear. Obsolete, but still around and will be removed. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Apr 21 20:42:19 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 16:42:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060421204219.BAFCA15212A@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 11 argus-2.0.6.fixes.1-10.fc4 emacs-auctex-11.82-2.fc4 git-1.3.0-1.fc4 i8kutils-1.25-8.fc4 perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple-0.13-1.fc4 perl-Sub-Uplevel-0.10-1.fc4 powermanga-0.80-2.fc4 pygame-1.7.1-3.fc4 splint-3.1.1-13.fc4 torque-2.1.0p0-0.10.200604211036cvs.fc4 wifiroamd-1.05-1.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Apr 21 20:42:50 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 16:42:50 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060421204250.E42B515212A@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 17 NetworkManager-vpnc-0.6.0-3.fc5 argus-2.0.6.fixes.1-10.fc5 emacs-auctex-11.82-3.fc5 git-1.3.0-1.fc5 hugs98-2005.03-2.fc5 i8kutils-1.25-8.fc5 octave-2.9.5-2.fc5 octave-forge-2006.03.17-2.fc5 perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple-0.13-1.fc5 perl-Sub-Uplevel-0.10-1.fc5 perl-Test-MockObject-1.06-1.fc5 powermanga-0.80-2.fc5 pygame-1.7.1-3.fc5 splint-3.1.1-13.fc5 torque-2.1.0p0-0.10.200604211036cvs.fc5 wifiroamd-1.05-1.fc5 yumex-0.99.17-1.0.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Apr 21 20:51:22 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 16:51:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060421205122.A75D415212A@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 23 NetworkManager-vpnc-0.6.0-3.fc6 argus-2.0.6.fixes.1-10.fc6 deutex-4.4.0-2.fc6 emacs-auctex-11.82-3.fc6 ghc-6.4.2-1.fc6 git-1.3.0-1.fc6 hugs98-2005.03-1.fc6 i8kutils-1.25-8.fc6 libassetml-1.2.1-2.fc6 paraview-2.4.3-7.fc6 perl-GSSAPI-0.21-1.fc6 perl-IO-Interface-0.98-1.fc6 perl-Locale-Maketext-Simple-0.13-1.fc6 perl-Sub-Uplevel-0.10-1.fc6 perl-Test-Deep-0.095-1.fc6 perl-Test-MockObject-1.06-1.fc6 powermanga-0.80-2.fc6 proftpd-1.3.0-1.fc6 pygame-1.7.1-3.fc6 splint-3.1.1-13.fc6 torque-2.1.0p0-0.10.200604211036cvs.fc6 wifiroamd-1.05-1.fc6 yumex-0.99.17-1.0.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 21 22:35:31 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 00:35:31 +0200 Subject: Changes explained (was: Re: Summary - Broken dependencies...) In-Reply-To: <20060421220730.592f5516.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060421193327.4065.15654@faldor.intranet> <20060421220730.592f5516.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060421223531.GB2421@free.fr> On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 10:07:30PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > The upgraded script includes a slightly modified and newer repoclosure > from yum-utils-0.5. The older one also looked at older dependencies > and hence failed to catch some breakage: > > On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 19:33:27 -0000, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > [TEST] Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > grads 1.9b4-7.fc4.1.i386 > > A nice catch actually. Version upgrade on March 3rd apparently > broke the ABI (libdap.so.3 -> libdap.so.4). Yep, I completely forgot to rebuild... It is fixed now, thanks. -- Pat From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Sat Apr 22 00:44:13 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 02:44:13 +0200 Subject: sylpheed-changes... (was: Changes explained (was: Re: Summary - Broken dependencies...)) In-Reply-To: <20060421220730.592f5516.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20060421193327.4065.15654@faldor.intranet> <20060421220730.592f5516.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060422024413.1c54766f@alkaid.a.lan> On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 22:07:30 +0200 Michael Schwendt wrote: > > libopensync-plugin-palm 0.18-2.fc4.i386 > > sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.i386 > > pilot-link downgrade and ABI break And again: Would have been nice to know... fc4 build of sylpheed-claws failed for some reason will look into it tomorrow... fc5 should be ok again. While add it: sylpheed-claws will no longer provide any plugins except the trayicon one. All other plugins can be found named sylpheed-claws-plugins-... For people who want all plugins the sylpheed-claws-plugins packaged pulled in all extra plugins and with the newest changes will also pull in the old core ones (they are still build from the core package so). This should make requirements easier (no need to pull in clamav or spamassassin). - Andreas -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 173 5803043 | mail preferred -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 191 bytes Desc: not available URL: From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 22 05:06:14 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 01:06:14 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060422050614.CA5A215212A@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 22 grads-1.9b4-11.fc6 koffice-langpack-1.5.0-1.fc6 nco-3.1.2-1.fc6 netcdf-3.6.1-1.fc6 perl-Archive-Extract-0.08-1.fc6 perl-Authen-SASL-2.10-1.fc6 perl-DBIx-DBSchema-0.31-1.fc6 perl-DBIx-SearchBuilder-1.43-1.fc6 perl-File-Fetch-0.07-1.fc6 perl-IPC-Cmd-0.24-1.fc6 perl-Locale-Maketext-Lexicon-0.60-1.fc6 perl-Log-Message-0.01-1.fc6 perl-Log-Message-Simple-0.01-1.fc6 perl-Object-Accessor-0.12-2.fc6 perl-Params-Util-0.11-1.fc6 perl-Params-Validate-0.81-1.fc6 perl-Term-UI-0.12-1.fc6 prboom-2.4.1-1.fc6 pygame-1.7.1-4.fc6 sylpheed-claws-2.1.1-1.fc6 sylpheed-claws-plugins-2.1.0-1.fc6 wmCalClock-1.25-7.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 22 08:30:24 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 10:30:24 +0200 Subject: Sponsorship process Message-ID: <4449E9A0.3070508@hhs.nl> Hi, First of all thanks to FESco for trusting me and making me a sponsor. With that said, I just started reading http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SponsorProcess And I have some questions, according to this page a new contributer should send a mail to the list: "Note that they should also have sent mail to fedora-extras-list with a package which they are proposing to add." But according to: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors The introductionary mail we used to have no longer is needed and indeed I haven't seen any of those mails in a long time. Also according to: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SponsorProcess The way to find people to sponsor is through the Fedora Account system, however there are currently only 2 people listed there, one who doesn't have a bugzilla account, atleast not with the mail address in the account system and the other who does have a bugzilla account, but 0 FE bugzilla activity. I was amazed by this since one of the reasons for me asking to become a sponsor is because of Fedora Status mails saying that the needs sponsor queue was ever growing. If I'm not mistaken the proper way to find people needing sponsors is to look at the FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 Also this bug says: "SPONSORS: when you accept the responsibility of reviewing a package, please take it off of this list." Shouldn't this be on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors instead / too. I have the feeling that currently not everybody is doing this (taken package review needing sponsors of the list when they have started the review). See for example: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177106 Thanks & Regards, Hans From michael at knox.net.nz Sat Apr 22 10:29:53 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 22:29:53 +1200 Subject: getting started with fedora extras build system Message-ID: <444A05A1.5070001@knox.net.nz> OK, So, I have had a packaged reviewed and am now sponsored. I have done all the stuff I needed to with https://admin.fedora.redhat.com/accounts/ However, when I go to check out something from CVS with my user name, i get this message: For more information on using the Fedora source code repositories, please visit http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UsingCvs Permission denied (publickey,keyboard-interactive). cvs [checkout aborted]: end of file from server (consult above messages if any) Now, I have reviewed http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UsingCvs and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsingCvsFaq But no insight is given to the above error. Could someone please tell me how this is meant to work? Thanks! Michael From paul at city-fan.org Sat Apr 22 10:48:18 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 11:48:18 +0100 Subject: Sponsorship process In-Reply-To: <4449E9A0.3070508@hhs.nl> References: <4449E9A0.3070508@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1145702898.12160.15.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 10:30 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > First of all thanks to FESco for trusting me and making me a sponsor. > With that said, I just started reading > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SponsorProcess Looks like the page is need of a few tweaks :-) > And I have some questions, according to this page a new contributer > should send a mail to the list: "Note that they should also have sent > mail to fedora-extras-list with a package which they are proposing to add." > > But according to: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors > > The introductionary mail we used to have no longer is needed and indeed > I haven't seen any of those mails in a long time. > > Also according to: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SponsorProcess > > The way to find people to sponsor is through the Fedora Account system, > however there are currently only 2 people listed there, one who doesn't > have a bugzilla account, atleast not with the mail address in the > account system and the other who does have a bugzilla account, but 0 FE > bugzilla activity. I was amazed by this since one of the reasons for me > asking to become a sponsor is because of Fedora Status mails saying that > the needs sponsor queue was ever growing. > > If I'm not mistaken the proper way to find people needing sponsors is to > look at the FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker bug: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 Yes, I would agree there. In fact, the Contributors page only tells people to get a Fedora Account after their package has been approved. The Contributors page also tells the submitter to mention that they need sponsoring, but doesn't mention adding the FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker bug, so some submitters won't have done this. > Also this bug says: "SPONSORS: when you accept the responsibility of > reviewing a package, please take it off of this list." Shouldn't this be > on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors instead / too. > > I have the feeling that currently not everybody is doing this (taken > package review needing sponsors of the list when they have started the > review). See for example: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177106 I'm not sure that this is the right thing to do anyway, at least not until some way through the review process. When I review a package from a new submitter, one of the things I'm looking for is their responsiveness to feedback, and I also try to see what other activity they may have on other mailing lists etc., to get a feel for whether I'm comfortable sponsoring them or not. During the review process, I may decide that I'm not comfortable sponsoring this particular submitter, (though I'd probably not change the blocker from FE-NEW to FE-REVIEW before making that decision). Another change I'd suggest is to: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors There is a section on mailing lists to join, after which it says: Read Other Submissions Read some other package submissions to learn about packaging and gain familiarity with the process and requirements. I'd add to this that joining the read-only fedora-package-review mailing list (not included in the aforementioned section on mailing lists) is a good way to see the process in action for other submissions. Paul. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 22 11:10:23 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 13:10:23 +0200 Subject: Sponsorship process In-Reply-To: <1145702898.12160.15.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> References: <4449E9A0.3070508@hhs.nl> <1145702898.12160.15.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> Message-ID: <20060422131023.abb0b547.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 11:48:18 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > > If I'm not mistaken the proper way to find people needing sponsors is to > > look at the FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker bug: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 > > Yes, I would agree there. In fact, the Contributors page only tells > people to get a Fedora Account after their package has been approved. > > The Contributors page also tells the submitter to mention that they need > sponsoring, but doesn't mention adding the FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker bug, > so some submitters won't have done this. This procedure has not been made official. The FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker is experimental and optional as I understand it. Better is really if new contributors post to fedora-extras-list, introducing their package review requests. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 22 12:42:14 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 14:42:14 +0200 Subject: Sponsorship process In-Reply-To: <20060422131023.abb0b547.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <4449E9A0.3070508@hhs.nl> <1145702898.12160.15.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <20060422131023.abb0b547.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <444A24A6.6030504@hhs.nl> Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 11:48:18 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > >>> If I'm not mistaken the proper way to find people needing sponsors is to >>> look at the FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker bug: >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 >> Yes, I would agree there. In fact, the Contributors page only tells >> people to get a Fedora Account after their package has been approved. >> >> The Contributors page also tells the submitter to mention that they need >> sponsoring, but doesn't mention adding the FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker bug, >> so some submitters won't have done this. > > This procedure has not been made official. The FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker is > experimental and optional as I understand it. Better is really if new > contributors post to fedora-extras-list, introducing their package review > requests. > I have no problem with this, I actually believe the old post an introduction mail to the list stating interest etc was a good idea, but this is not what is currently advertised in the wiki. As things stand the procedure advertised to new contributers and those to sponsors differ, and in my 6 hours being a sponsor experience FE-NEEDSPONSOR actually helps me to find people who need a sponsor whereas the currently advertised procedure does not. Regards, Hans From fedora at leemhuis.info Sat Apr 22 13:30:21 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 15:30:21 +0200 Subject: Sponsorship process In-Reply-To: <20060422131023.abb0b547.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <4449E9A0.3070508@hhs.nl> <1145702898.12160.15.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <20060422131023.abb0b547.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1145712621.2336.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Samstag, den 22.04.2006, 13:10 +0200 schrieb Michael Schwendt: > On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 11:48:18 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > > The Contributors page also tells the submitter to mention that they need > > sponsoring, but doesn't mention adding the FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker bug, > > so some submitters won't have done this. > > This procedure has not been made official. The FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker is > experimental and optional as I understand it. I think we should make it official. Other opinions? CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From fedora at leemhuis.info Sat Apr 22 13:39:19 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 15:39:19 +0200 Subject: Sponsorship process In-Reply-To: <1145702898.12160.15.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> References: <4449E9A0.3070508@hhs.nl> <1145702898.12160.15.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> Message-ID: <1145713160.2336.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Samstag, den 22.04.2006, 11:48 +0100 schrieb Paul Howarth: > On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 10:30 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > > Hi, > > > > First of all thanks to FESco for trusting me and making me a sponsor. > > With that said, I just started reading > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SponsorProcess > Looks like the page is need of a few tweaks :-) Well, it's a wiki -- feel free to change things. Yes, those pages are more important than others and we need to be careful that they remain read- and understandable. But I still think every contributor is free to add things. Just be more careful. [...] > Another change I'd suggest is to: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors > > There is a section on mailing lists to join, after which it says: > > Read Other Submissions > Read some other package submissions to learn about packaging and gain > familiarity with the process and requirements. > > I'd add to this that joining the read-only fedora-package-review mailing > list (not included in the aforementioned section on mailing lists) is a > good way to see the process in action for other submissions. Go ahead :-) -- Thorsten Leemhuis From bdpepple at ameritech.net Sat Apr 22 13:39:38 2006 From: bdpepple at ameritech.net (Brian Pepple) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 09:39:38 -0400 Subject: Sponsorship process In-Reply-To: <1145712621.2336.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <4449E9A0.3070508@hhs.nl> <1145702898.12160.15.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <20060422131023.abb0b547.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145712621.2336.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1145713178.16689.0.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 15:30 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Samstag, den 22.04.2006, 13:10 +0200 schrieb Michael Schwendt: > > On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 11:48:18 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > > > > The Contributors page also tells the submitter to mention that they need > > > sponsoring, but doesn't mention adding the FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker bug, > > > so some submitters won't have done this. > > > > This procedure has not been made official. The FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker is > > experimental and optional as I understand it. > > I think we should make it official. Other opinions? +1, with all the traffic on the list it's too easy for sponsor requests to get lost in the noise. /B -- Brian Pepple gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From tibbs at math.uh.edu Sat Apr 22 15:25:25 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 10:25:25 -0500 Subject: Sponsorship process In-Reply-To: <1145713178.16689.0.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> (Brian Pepple's message of "Sat, 22 Apr 2006 09:39:38 -0400") References: <4449E9A0.3070508@hhs.nl> <1145702898.12160.15.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <20060422131023.abb0b547.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145712621.2336.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1145713178.16689.0.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> Message-ID: >>>>> "BP" == Brian Pepple writes: BP> with all the traffic on the list it's too easy for sponsor BP> requests to get lost in the noise. Not only that, but as I understand the rules, since I can't sponsor I need to avoid reviewing packages that require sponsorship and from bugzilla tickets alone I often can't tell. The NEEDSPONSOR blocker would tell me that. - J< From mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 22 18:13:04 2006 From: mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org (Mike McGrath) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 13:13:04 -0500 Subject: The system doesn't always work Message-ID: <3237e4410604221113s79078144lee1a800280f24a25@mail.gmail.com> Does anyone else want to review this? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180092 From rdieter at math.unl.edu Sat Apr 22 18:47:06 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 13:47:06 -0500 Subject: The system doesn't always work In-Reply-To: <3237e4410604221113s79078144lee1a800280f24a25@mail.gmail.com> References: <3237e4410604221113s79078144lee1a800280f24a25@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Mike McGrath wrote: > Does anyone else want to review this? > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180092 It appears Jochen would approve the submission if it weren't for your stubborn refusal to use fedora-usermgmt. So, what you're really asking is for someone else *who doesn't believe-in/support fedora-usermgmt* to review it. Right? In the meantime, the Packaging Guidelines should be updated to clarify when use of fedora-usermngt is warranted. I realize there's some controversy involved, so should FESCO get involved to officially bless/veto the use of fedora-usermngt? -- Rex From kevin-fedora-extras at scrye.com Sat Apr 22 19:02:18 2006 From: kevin-fedora-extras at scrye.com (Kevin Fenzi) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 13:02:18 -0600 (MDT) Subject: RRDtool is in need of attention References: <20060412181252.4f388242@python2> <20060412.144249.891065190.kevin@scrye.com> Message-ID: <20060422.130218.789237533.kevin@scrye.com> >>>>> "Chris" == Chris Ricker writes: Chris> On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Kevin Fenzi wrote: Looks like cacti and Chris> munin are the two packages already in Extras which use it. Do Chris> they both work with 1.2? >> I think munin does. I haven't tested it, but from what I have read, >> it should work with it fine. I can try and test it out at some >> point here. If you can make a 1.2.x rrdtool test package that would >> be helpfull. ;) Chris> I just updated devel CVS to 1.2. You can check that out and Chris> build it to get something to test with Thanks. I built the new version on devel from cvs and upgraded my test box and did some testing. No problems that I can see...munin works fine with 1.2. The graphs look nicer too. :) Chris> Note that I didn't request it built for devel -- figured I'd Chris> wait until hearing if it works for munin first, then try to Chris> deal with the php issues, clean it up, etc Everything is looking good from here with munin, so I think you can push the update whenever you get it cleaned up. Were you going to upgrade fc5 and older with 1.2? or just devel? The older branch munin's should be fine with 1.2 as well... Chris> later, chris Chris> -- fedora-extras-list mailing list Chris> fedora-extras-list at redhat.com Chris> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list kevin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From michael at knox.net.nz Sat Apr 22 19:20:08 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 07:20:08 +1200 Subject: getting started with fedora extras build system In-Reply-To: <444A05A1.5070001@knox.net.nz> References: <444A05A1.5070001@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <444A81E8.6010200@knox.net.nz> Michael J Knox wrote: > OK, > > So, I have had a packaged reviewed and am now sponsored. > > I have done all the stuff I needed to with > https://admin.fedora.redhat.com/accounts/ > > However, when I go to check out something from CVS with my user name, i > get this message: > > For more information on using the Fedora source code repositories, > please visit http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UsingCvs > Permission denied (publickey,keyboard-interactive). > cvs [checkout aborted]: end of file from server (consult above messages > if any) > > Now, I have reviewed > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UsingCvs > > and > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsingCvsFaq > > But no insight is given to the above error. > > Could someone please tell me how this is meant to work? > I would appreciate any pointers to get this working.... :-( Michael From mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 22 22:58:49 2006 From: mmcgrath at fedoraproject.org (Mike McGrath) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 17:58:49 -0500 Subject: The system doesn't always work In-Reply-To: References: <3237e4410604221113s79078144lee1a800280f24a25@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3237e4410604221558x2e5259c2o79f05d238b737720@mail.gmail.com> > In the meantime, the Packaging Guidelines should be updated to clarify > when use of fedora-usermngt is warranted. I realize there's some > controversy involved, so should FESCO get involved to officially > bless/veto the use of fedora-usermngt? > Exactly. I'd be happy to use it if it were required... Its not. -Mike From jspaleta at gmail.com Sun Apr 23 01:56:30 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 21:56:30 -0400 Subject: The system doesn't always work In-Reply-To: <3237e4410604221558x2e5259c2o79f05d238b737720@mail.gmail.com> References: <3237e4410604221113s79078144lee1a800280f24a25@mail.gmail.com> <3237e4410604221558x2e5259c2o79f05d238b737720@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910604221856k3e1e8720yc9b8d15288b4ec55@mail.gmail.com> On 4/22/06, Mike McGrath wrote: > Exactly. I'd be happy to use it if it were required... Its not. If you and the current reviewer can not agree on the usage of an optional suggestion, have the reviewer place the review back in FE-NEW status so that its clear to other potential reviewers that the review process needs to be restarted by someone else. -jef From michael at knox.net.nz Sun Apr 23 02:01:55 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 14:01:55 +1200 Subject: getting started with fedora extras build system In-Reply-To: <444A05A1.5070001@knox.net.nz> References: <444A05A1.5070001@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <444AE013.6030706@knox.net.nz> Michael J Knox wrote: > OK, > > So, I have had a packaged reviewed and am now sponsored. > > I have done all the stuff I needed to with > https://admin.fedora.redhat.com/accounts/ > > However, when I go to check out something from CVS with my user name, i > get this message: > > For more information on using the Fedora source code repositories, > please visit http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UsingCvs > Permission denied (publickey,keyboard-interactive). > cvs [checkout aborted]: end of file from server (consult above messages > if any) > > Now, I have reviewed > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UsingCvs > > and > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsingCvsFaq > > But no insight is given to the above error. > > Could someone please tell me how this is meant to work? Thanks to "ignacio" on IRC, we have done a little testing, but to no avail... So, just to clarify... Yes, I have an account (mjk) Yes, my id_dsa.pub has been uploaded Yes I have a ~/.ssh/config which looks like: Host cvs.fedora.redhat.com Compression yes ForwardAgent no ForwardX11 no IdentityFile ~/.ssh/id_dsa Protocol 2 User mjk Cipher blowfish My CVSROOT is: [monkey at localhost ~]$ echo $CVSROOT :ext:mjk at cvs.fedora.redhat.com:/cvs/extras How ever, I still get the same Permission denied error when I attempt to check anything out. Michael From michael at knox.net.nz Sun Apr 23 02:14:53 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 14:14:53 +1200 Subject: getting started with fedora extras build system In-Reply-To: <444AE013.6030706@knox.net.nz> References: <444A05A1.5070001@knox.net.nz> <444AE013.6030706@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <444AE31D.3080707@knox.net.nz> Michael J Knox wrote: > Michael J Knox wrote: >> OK, >> >> So, I have had a packaged reviewed and am now sponsored. >> >> I have done all the stuff I needed to with >> https://admin.fedora.redhat.com/accounts/ >> >> However, when I go to check out something from CVS with my user name, >> i get this message: >> >> For more information on using the Fedora source code repositories, >> please visit http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UsingCvs >> Permission denied (publickey,keyboard-interactive). >> cvs [checkout aborted]: end of file from server (consult above >> messages if any) >> >> Now, I have reviewed >> >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UsingCvs >> >> and >> >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsingCvsFaq >> >> But no insight is given to the above error. >> >> Could someone please tell me how this is meant to work? > > Thanks to "ignacio" on IRC, we have done a little testing, but to no > avail... > > So, just to clarify... > > Yes, I have an account (mjk) > Yes, my id_dsa.pub has been uploaded > Yes I have a ~/.ssh/config which looks like: > > Host cvs.fedora.redhat.com > Compression yes > ForwardAgent no > ForwardX11 no > IdentityFile ~/.ssh/id_dsa > Protocol 2 > User mjk > Cipher blowfish > > My CVSROOT is: > [monkey at localhost ~]$ echo $CVSROOT > :ext:mjk at cvs.fedora.redhat.com:/cvs/extras > > How ever, I still get the same Permission denied error when I attempt to > check anything out. Fixed.. Seems you need to upload the _correct_ key for things to work.. fancy that. Thanks ignacio for helping out. Michael From seg at haxxed.com Sun Apr 23 06:54:44 2006 From: seg at haxxed.com (Callum Lerwick) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 01:54:44 -0500 Subject: The system doesn't always work In-Reply-To: References: <3237e4410604221113s79078144lee1a800280f24a25@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1145775284.22802.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 13:47 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > In the meantime, the Packaging Guidelines should be updated to clarify > when use of fedora-usermngt is warranted. I realize there's some > controversy involved, so should FESCO get involved to officially > bless/veto the use of fedora-usermngt? Yes please. It seems absolutely insane to me to not have a set policy on something as important as this. Either we use fedora-usermgmt in all packages, or not at all. (Personally my vote's for merging the fedora-usermgmt functionality into adduser itself, as Jef recommended IIRC.) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From rc040203 at freenet.de Sun Apr 23 07:52:56 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 09:52:56 +0200 Subject: The system doesn't always work In-Reply-To: <1145775284.22802.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <3237e4410604221113s79078144lee1a800280f24a25@mail.gmail.com> <1145775284.22802.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1145778777.986.10.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 01:54 -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote: > On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 13:47 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > > In the meantime, the Packaging Guidelines should be updated to clarify > > when use of fedora-usermngt is warranted. I realize there's some > > controversy involved, so should FESCO get involved to officially > > bless/veto the use of fedora-usermngt? > > Yes please. Well, though I'd appreciate a decision to remove fedora-usermngt, I don't think such a decision would be helpful, because this isn't a political issue to draw an arbitrary decision or to vote on, but a controversial technical issue. One party wants to make fedora-usermgnt mandatory, the other party considers it script-kiddy crap". I am a member of the latter party and would consider FESCO drawing a decision "pro fedora-usermgnt" as a severe project leadership fault and them abusing their "management powers" to overrule technical expertise. > It seems absolutely insane to me to not have a set policy on > something as important as this. Either we use fedora-usermgmt in all > packages, or not at all. (Personally my vote's for merging the > fedora-usermgmt functionality into adduser itself, as Jef recommended > IIRC.) This is completely different (and less controversial) topic. Ralf From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 23 09:44:46 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 11:44:46 +0200 Subject: The system doesn't always work In-Reply-To: <1145778777.986.10.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <3237e4410604221113s79078144lee1a800280f24a25@mail.gmail.com> <1145775284.22802.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1145778777.986.10.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20060423114446.160cf56d.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 09:52:56 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 01:54 -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote: > > On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 13:47 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > > > In the meantime, the Packaging Guidelines should be updated to clarify > > > when use of fedora-usermngt is warranted. I realize there's some > > > controversy involved, so should FESCO get involved to officially > > > bless/veto the use of fedora-usermngt? > > > > Yes please. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines <-- I fail to find fedora-usermgmt in there. It's not mentioned in the Packaging Guidelines either. > Well, though I'd appreciate a decision to remove fedora-usermngt, I > don't think such a decision would be helpful, because this isn't a > political issue to draw an arbitrary decision or to vote on, but a > controversial technical issue. It is not _so_ controversial on the technical level as a recent thread on this list has demonstrated. There is no alternative implementation available. The problem that is left is that a few opponents, who don't have any interest in what problems fedora-usermgmt solves, show ignorance with regard to its benefits. In the recent thread that made it quite tiresome to repeat pointing out the benefits of automated [e.g. kickstart based, network based] installations. > One party wants to make fedora-usermgnt mandatory, the other party > considers it script-kiddy crap". > > I am a member of the latter party and would consider FESCO drawing a > decision "pro fedora-usermgnt" as a severe project leadership fault and > them abusing their "management powers" to overrule technical expertise. Calm down. For example, I see no point in making it mandatory as long as such technology is not available in Fedora Core. Transparent relocation of uids/gids is a problem which is not easy to solve. fedora-usermgmt makes it semi-transparent only. Trying to get it included in shadow-utils is cheap talk. From jspaleta at gmail.com Sun Apr 23 15:07:22 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 11:07:22 -0400 Subject: The system doesn't always work In-Reply-To: <1145775284.22802.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <3237e4410604221113s79078144lee1a800280f24a25@mail.gmail.com> <1145775284.22802.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <604aa7910604230807y5f560c11q322e7b815e71125a@mail.gmail.com> On 4/23/06, Callum Lerwick wrote: > Yes please. It seems absolutely insane to me to not have a set policy on > something as important as this. Either we use fedora-usermgmt in all > packages, or not at all. (Personally my vote's for merging the > fedora-usermgmt functionality into adduser itself, as Jef recommended > IIRC.) I dont think ive made any comments on fedora-usermgmt. So if I'm the Jef you are talking about, please be so kind as to reference whatever comment you are refering to which is outside the current thread by pulling a url from the webarchive of the list. -jef From tcallawa at redhat.com Sun Apr 23 17:25:12 2006 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom 'spot' Callaway) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:25:12 -0500 Subject: The system doesn't always work In-Reply-To: <20060423114446.160cf56d.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <3237e4410604221113s79078144lee1a800280f24a25@mail.gmail.com> <1145775284.22802.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1145778777.986.10.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060423114446.160cf56d.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1145813112.6809.203.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 11:44 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 09:52:56 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 01:54 -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote: > > > On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 13:47 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > > > > In the meantime, the Packaging Guidelines should be updated to clarify > > > > when use of fedora-usermngt is warranted. I realize there's some > > > > controversy involved, so should FESCO get involved to officially > > > > bless/veto the use of fedora-usermngt? > > > > > > Yes please. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines <-- I fail > to find fedora-usermgmt in there. It's not mentioned in the Packaging > Guidelines either. Just to further make this point: You do not have to use fedora-usermgmt. You can use it if you would like to, but it is NOT required. No review should be held up solely on the inclusion of fedora-usermgmt. I've considered making a policy of "no hardcoding UID/GID" in the spec, but that is a different issue (and the package in question is not hardcoding UID/GID). Since UID_MIN is 500, using useradd -r will not stomp on the fedora-usermgmt packages for at least the next hundred+ fedora package that use it. And no, I really don't want to get into another round of arguments over this. There are valid reasons on both sides to use both mechanisms, so I'm not going to force anyone to either mechanism, nor do I plan to make either mechanism the "official" mechanism anytime soon. ~spot -- Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Senior Sales Engineer || GPG ID: 93054260 Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices) Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my! From seg at haxxed.com Sun Apr 23 17:25:07 2006 From: seg at haxxed.com (Callum Lerwick) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:25:07 -0500 Subject: The system doesn't always work In-Reply-To: <604aa7910604230807y5f560c11q322e7b815e71125a@mail.gmail.com> References: <3237e4410604221113s79078144lee1a800280f24a25@mail.gmail.com> <1145775284.22802.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910604230807y5f560c11q322e7b815e71125a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1145813107.22802.63.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 11:07 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > I dont think ive made any comments on fedora-usermgmt. So if I'm the > Jef you are talking about, please be so kind as to reference whatever > comment you are refering to which is outside the current thread by > pulling a url from the webarchive of the list. Well then I don't remember correctly. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 23 18:04:19 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 14:04:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060423180419.D81BA15212A@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 3 grads-1.9b4-11.fc3 perl-Data-HexDump-0.02-2.fc3 wmCalClock-1.25-5.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 23 18:05:22 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 14:05:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060423180522.3DAD715212A@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 29 dejavu-fonts-2.5.0-1.fc4 deutex-4.4.0-2.fc4 grads-1.9b4-11.fc4.1 koffice-1.5.0-1.fc4 koffice-langpack-1.5.0-1.fc4 libopensync-plugin-palm-0.18-3.fc4 ltsp-utils-0.25-2 nco-3.1.2-1.fc4 netcdf-3.6.1-1.fc4 perl-Archive-Extract-0.08-1.fc4 perl-Authen-Radius-0.12-2.fc4 perl-Authen-SASL-2.10-1.fc4 perl-Config-Tiny-2.06-1.fc4 perl-DBIx-DBSchema-0.31-1.fc4 perl-DBIx-SearchBuilder-1.43-1.fc4 perl-Data-HexDump-0.02-2.fc4 perl-Error-0.15008-1.fc4 perl-File-Fetch-0.07-1.fc4 perl-GSSAPI-0.21-1.fc4 perl-IO-Interface-0.98-1.fc4 perl-IPC-Cmd-0.24-1.fc4 perl-List-MoreUtils-0.19-1.fc4 perl-Object-Accessor-0.12-2.fc4 perl-Params-Util-0.11-1.fc4 perl-Test-Deep-0.095-1.fc4 prboom-2.4.1-1.fc4 prboom-2.4.1-2.fc4 pygame-1.7.1-4.fc4 wmCalClock-1.25-5.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 23 18:07:33 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 14:07:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060423180733.C9DF915212A@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 42 SDL_mixer-1.2.6-7.fc5 ccid-1.0.1-1.fc5 dejavu-fonts-2.4.1-1.fc5 deutex-4.4.0-2.fc5 ecore-0.9.9.026-2.fc5 edje-0.5.0.026-1.fc5 evas-0.9.9.026-2.fc5 ghc-6.4.2-1.fc5 grads-1.9b4-11.fc5 koffice-1.5.0-1.fc5 koffice-langpack-1.5.0-1.fc5 libopensync-plugin-palm-0.18-4.fc5 libsamplerate-0.1.2-4.fc5 ltsp-utils-0.25-2 nco-3.1.2-1.fc5 netcdf-3.6.1-1.fc5 pcsc-lite-1.3.1-1.fc5 perl-Archive-Extract-0.08-1.fc5 perl-Authen-Radius-0.12-2.fc5 perl-Authen-SASL-2.10-1.fc5 perl-Class-Autouse-1.26-1.fc5 perl-Config-Tiny-2.06-1.fc5 perl-DBIx-DBSchema-0.31-1.fc5 perl-DBIx-SearchBuilder-1.43-1.fc5 perl-Data-HexDump-0.02-2.fc5 perl-Error-0.15008-1.fc5 perl-File-Fetch-0.07-1.fc5 perl-GSSAPI-0.21-1.fc5 perl-IO-Interface-0.98-1.fc5 perl-IPC-Cmd-0.24-1.fc5 perl-List-MoreUtils-0.19-1.fc5 perl-Object-Accessor-0.12-2.fc5 perl-Params-Util-0.11-1.fc5 perl-Params-Validate-0.81-1.fc5 perl-Test-Deep-0.095-1.fc5 prboom-2.4.1-1.fc5 prboom-2.4.1-2.fc5 pygame-1.7.1-4.fc5 sylpheed-claws-2.1.1-1.fc5 sylpheed-claws-plugins-2.1.0-1.fc5 w3c-libwww-5.4.1-0.3.20060206cvs.fc5 wmCalClock-1.25-7.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 23 18:25:22 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 14:25:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060423182522.C08F715214F@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 1 ltsp-utils-0.25-3.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 23 18:25:17 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 14:25:17 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060423182517.7D46C15212A@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 1 ltsp-utils-0.25-3.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 23 18:41:51 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 14:41:51 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060423184151.4265315212A@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 1 dejavu-fonts-2.4.1-1.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sun Apr 23 18:42:19 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 14:42:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060423184219.5812515212A@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 0 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Apr 23 18:53:09 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 20:53:09 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future Message-ID: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hi all! The Fedora Extras Steering Committee (FESCo) is now round about a year old. I seems to me that the time has come to ask questions like: 1) Will those people currently in FESCo stay there forever? 3) Will new members join? 3) Will existing members step down? 4) How do we want to proceed with FESCo? and (related to that) 5) Did FESCo really work well? Is the Fedora Extras community satisfied with the Job FESCo did? 6) How can FESCo be improved? I would appreciate feedback here on the list for answers to question 5 and 6. My take: FESCo worked okay -- not really good, but also not to bad. But FESCo (and Fedora Extras) can still (and IMHO should) be improved a lot. The Schedule http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule still lists a lot of todo items and the ideas container http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/IdeasContainer even more. FESCo should help drive some things from theses list forward because it seems some are good ideas, but nobody did realize them yet. Okay, back to questions 1-4; those are the real reason for this mail: No, FESCo membership is no lifetime position. A rotation that brings in fresh blood and new ideas seems necessary now and then. It seems to me that we have reached that point now. And some current members want to step down in any case. Due to that we probably need to formalize the whole FESCo structure. The current FESCo-members discussed this a bit on the private fesco-mailinglist and during the last FESCo-Meeting on IRC. See the IRC-Log at http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SteeringCommittee/Meeting-20060420 for details. The big questions (and proposed answers) are: - How many members should FESCo have? FESCO currently has 17 members. The general consensus is that the number of members should remain odd. Thrown into the ring during the last IRC-Meeting were 9, 11, 13, 15 or 17 members. Reasons for a smaller group: More people make it harder to make decisions. Reasons for a big group: More people can make more things happen and the load per member is a bit lower. - How to get into FESCo? The current FESCo-members were simply chosen because they seemed to be the right people for the job when Fedora Extras/FESCo started/was still new. This might have the smell of "dictatorship" -- it IMHO was okay for the start, but we need some form of election in the longer term. Who elects whom? Good question. "Who elects" -- Some people want a public voting by all fedora extras maintainers. That would be democratic, but running large scale voting elections takes a lot of effort. Other ideas: old FESCo elects new FESCo. (there was actually a third option that was mentioned during the IRC-Meeting: "How about appointment by the benevolent dictator thl?" and "I move that thl just chooses people to join." -- but I doubt that this is a good idea) "Whom"? -- The current FESCo has the problem that some people are quite inactive. So I (and some others, too) want to lay the hurdle to get into FESCo a bit higher to have more active members in the future. Some quotes from the IRC-Meeting in that context - "I think we should have people that 1) show up for meetings 2) are active leaders in Extras." - "I think merit is a good measure of who belongs in FESCO." - "if people want to join FESCO, they should write their own mission statement, goals, objectives, etc." Current plan to achieve it: Everyone (also current FESCo members!) who wants to be member of the next FESCo needs to nominate him/herself on fedora-extras-list; in that self-nomination-mail everyone needs to lay down some plans what he or she wants to achieve when elected for FESCo. Of course all fedora extras maintainers are allowed to nominate other people for FESCo -- but the potential candidates still have to do lay down their plans own their own. - For how long are people elected for FESCo? One year seem reasonable to me. They can be re-elected. To make the whole process a bit easier: Elect a new FESCo round about four or six weeks after a odd-numbered Fedora Core (e.g. FC5, FC7, FC9, ...) was published - How is the Chair elected? We have two options here afaics: -- the new FESCo elects a (new) chair -- the one with most votes in the election is nominated as FESCo-Chair; if he does not want to do the job the one with the seconds most votes gets the job offered, .... - What is expected from FESCo members? IMHO is something like this: Try to make it to the weekly IRC-Meetings. Participate in discussions on the mailing lists (especially if you can't make the meetings). Help out where help is needed, but nobody helps yet. If there is a boring task that nobody wants to do step up and do it if it really needs to done. And the IMHO most important thing: Take at least one task from the long "How Fedora Extras could be improved" list and help realizing it. - Anything else Probably I'm forgetting a lot of things, but I hope I covered all the important ones for now. Proposed plan: - Number of FESCo members in the future: 13 - Everyone that wants to nominate him/herself for the next FESCo period needs to write a self-nomination to fedora-extras-list (proposed date: between 1. and 7. May 2006). It should at least answer this questions: -- What important things did you do for Fedora in the past (in general and specific to Extras) -- What do you want to achieve during your time in FESCo? Please write a short mission statement with goals, objectives, etc! - All people who maintain packages in Extras can vote for as many members as they want to vote for (proposed date: between 9. and 14 May 2006). - The top (n) vote-getters are in. - A new FESCo-chair is elected by the newly elected FESCo on the first meeting (that would be 20. May 2006) - Next FESCo election round about four weeks after FC7 was published Big missing piece in this plan: How to actually vote? Does anyone have experiences with E-Mail/Web voting system? How fast can such a voting system be set up? How do we make sure that we can trust the results? CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil URL: From ville.skytta at iki.fi Sun Apr 23 18:55:40 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 21:55:40 +0300 Subject: extras-buildsys/utils extras-sign-move.py,1.11,1.12 In-Reply-To: <200604231840.k3NIe3Xv009102@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200604231840.k3NIe3Xv009102@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1145818540.16878.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 11:40 -0700, Seth Vidal wrote: > Modified Files: > extras-sign-move.py > Log Message: > > if the file already exists, unlink it - this lets us sneak out silent > changes [...] > if not DEBUG: > + if os.path.exists(rpmloc): > + os.unlink(rpmloc) > shutil.copy2(package, rpmloc) Eh... rationale? We should be making sure that this _cannot_ happen, not make it easier or automatic. From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Sun Apr 23 19:00:36 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:00:36 -0400 Subject: extras-buildsys/utils extras-sign-move.py,1.11,1.12 In-Reply-To: <1145818540.16878.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <200604231840.k3NIe3Xv009102@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <1145818540.16878.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1145818836.23350.1.camel@cutter> On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 21:55 +0300, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 11:40 -0700, Seth Vidal wrote: > > > Modified Files: > > extras-sign-move.py > > Log Message: > > > > if the file already exists, unlink it - this lets us sneak out silent > > changes > [...] > > if not DEBUG: > > + if os.path.exists(rpmloc): > > + os.unlink(rpmloc) > > shutil.copy2(package, rpmloc) > > Eh... rationale? We should be making sure that this _cannot_ happen, > not make it easier or automatic. in this specific case I added it b/c some num-num updated their packages w/o iterating the release. So we ended up with a conflict. If you'd like to reverse it - so that we trust the repo over the just-built - that's fine - just make it: if os.path.exists(rpmloc): os.unlink(package) then skip the shutil.copy2() that'll work just as well, though, to be clear - I think it would be handy to be able to overwrrite a change. -sv From jspaleta at gmail.com Sun Apr 23 20:26:35 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 16:26:35 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> On 4/23/06, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > - For how long are people elected for FESCo? > One year seem reasonable to me. They can be re-elected. To make the > whole process a bit easier: Elect a new FESCo round about four or six > weeks after a odd-numbered Fedora Core (e.g. FC5, FC7, FC9, ...) was > published With 1 year appointment terms I'd rather see elections of half of fesco every 6 months. I don't think potentially turning over the whole committee in a single election is a good idea for continuity of purpose or long term planning issues. -jef From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Mon Apr 24 02:46:48 2006 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 21:46:48 -0500 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060424024647.GA31508@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 04:26:35PM -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 4/23/06, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > - For how long are people elected for FESCo? > > One year seem reasonable to me. They can be re-elected. To make the > > whole process a bit easier: Elect a new FESCo round about four or six > > weeks after a odd-numbered Fedora Core (e.g. FC5, FC7, FC9, ...) was > > published > > With 1 year appointment terms I'd rather see elections of half of > fesco every 6 months. I don't think potentially turning over the > whole committee in a single election is a good idea for continuity of > purpose or long term planning issues. Yes, I agree. We want a mix of both old and new members at any one time. That way, we don't get a radical change of plans or focus every year. So, there are some members who want to leave FESCO at the moment. That is fine. Thank them for their contributions and let them go. Then elect enough members to make FESCO a governing body of 13. Then in 6 months, those that were there already have their term up and you elect another half. josh From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Mon Apr 24 03:12:32 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 23:12:32 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <20060424024647.GA31508@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> <20060424024647.GA31508@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <1145848352.25417.3.camel@cutter> On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 21:46 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > Yes, I agree. We want a mix of both old and new members at any one time. > That way, we don't get a radical change of plans or focus every year. > > So, there are some members who want to leave FESCO at the moment. That is > fine. Thank them for their contributions and let them go. Then elect > enough members to make FESCO a governing body of 13. Then in 6 months, > those that were there already have their term up and you elect another half. At the risk of sounding pessmistic - do we have 7 new people who actually want the jobs? Also how do we handle the issue of security in terms of the package-signing key during transitions? Clearly anyone outgoing shouldn't keep access to the key. -sv From michael at knox.net.nz Mon Apr 24 03:23:14 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 15:23:14 +1200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145848352.25417.3.camel@cutter> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> <20060424024647.GA31508@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145848352.25417.3.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <444C44A2.2070405@knox.net.nz> seth vidal wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 21:46 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: >> Yes, I agree. We want a mix of both old and new members at any one time. >> That way, we don't get a radical change of plans or focus every year. >> >> So, there are some members who want to leave FESCO at the moment. That is >> fine. Thank them for their contributions and let them go. Then elect >> enough members to make FESCO a governing body of 13. Then in 6 months, >> those that were there already have their term up and you elect another half. > > At the risk of sounding pessmistic - do we have 7 new people who > actually want the jobs? Also how do we handle the issue of security in > terms of the package-signing key during transitions? Clearly anyone > outgoing shouldn't keep access to the key. > I would certainly be interested in taking part in FESCO, though I doubt my current level of presence and suitability in Fedora Extras is probably not up to par with others, but I do think you would find the right people easily enough. Who says that someone _has_ to go at the end of 6months? Can they not be re-elected if they have been nominated? Michael From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Mon Apr 24 03:27:55 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 23:27:55 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <444C44A2.2070405@knox.net.nz> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> <20060424024647.GA31508@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145848352.25417.3.camel@cutter> <444C44A2.2070405@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <1145849275.25417.5.camel@cutter> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 15:23 +1200, Michael J. Knox wrote: > seth vidal wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 21:46 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > >> Yes, I agree. We want a mix of both old and new members at any one time. > >> That way, we don't get a radical change of plans or focus every year. > >> > >> So, there are some members who want to leave FESCO at the moment. That is > >> fine. Thank them for their contributions and let them go. Then elect > >> enough members to make FESCO a governing body of 13. Then in 6 months, > >> those that were there already have their term up and you elect another half. > > > > At the risk of sounding pessmistic - do we have 7 new people who > > actually want the jobs? Also how do we handle the issue of security in > > terms of the package-signing key during transitions? Clearly anyone > > outgoing shouldn't keep access to the key. > > > > I would certainly be interested in taking part in FESCO, though I doubt > my current level of presence and suitability in Fedora Extras is > probably not up to par with others, but I do think you would find the > right people easily enough. > > Who says that someone _has_ to go at the end of 6months? Can they not be > re-elected if they have been nominated? not saying they do but to be honest you have to be a special kind of masochist to keep doing this stuff and not be paid for it. -sv From michael at knox.net.nz Mon Apr 24 03:31:37 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 15:31:37 +1200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145849275.25417.5.camel@cutter> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> <20060424024647.GA31508@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145848352.25417.3.camel@cutter> <444C44A2.2070405@knox.net.nz> <1145849275.25417.5.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <444C4699.1020402@knox.net.nz> seth vidal wrote: > On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 15:23 +1200, Michael J. Knox wrote: >> seth vidal wrote: >>> On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 21:46 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: >>>> Yes, I agree. We want a mix of both old and new members at any one time. >>>> That way, we don't get a radical change of plans or focus every year. >>>> >>>> So, there are some members who want to leave FESCO at the moment. That is >>>> fine. Thank them for their contributions and let them go. Then elect >>>> enough members to make FESCO a governing body of 13. Then in 6 months, >>>> those that were there already have their term up and you elect another half. >>> At the risk of sounding pessmistic - do we have 7 new people who >>> actually want the jobs? Also how do we handle the issue of security in >>> terms of the package-signing key during transitions? Clearly anyone >>> outgoing shouldn't keep access to the key. >>> >> I would certainly be interested in taking part in FESCO, though I doubt >> my current level of presence and suitability in Fedora Extras is >> probably not up to par with others, but I do think you would find the >> right people easily enough. >> >> Who says that someone _has_ to go at the end of 6months? Can they not be >> re-elected if they have been nominated? > > not saying they do but to be honest you have to be a special kind of > masochist to keep doing this stuff and not be paid for it. > Agreed... but masochist are abound.. I worked for a commercial distro for 3 years with out being paid a cent.. :-) sadist? masochist? absolutely. Michael From michael at knox.net.nz Mon Apr 24 03:32:59 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 15:32:59 +1200 Subject: iFolder server Message-ID: <444C46EB.5080607@knox.net.nz> Hey all, I have packaged up ifolder server, but I seem to be hitting some brick walls with the actual running of it. I wonder if anyone would be interested in helping package this with me? If so, drop me an email off list Thanks! Michael From fedora at leemhuis.info Mon Apr 24 04:35:54 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 06:35:54 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <20060424024647.GA31508@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> <20060424024647.GA31508@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <1145853354.18962.7.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Sonntag, den 23.04.2006, 21:46 -0500 schrieb Josh Boyer: > On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 04:26:35PM -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > On 4/23/06, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > - For how long are people elected for FESCo? > > > One year seem reasonable to me. They can be re-elected. To make the > > > whole process a bit easier: Elect a new FESCo round about four or six > > > weeks after a odd-numbered Fedora Core (e.g. FC5, FC7, FC9, ...) was > > > published > > > > With 1 year appointment terms I'd rather see elections of half of > > fesco every 6 months. I don't think potentially turning over the > > whole committee in a single election is a good idea for continuity of > > purpose or long term planning issues. > > Yes, I agree. We want a mix of both old and new members at any one time. > That way, we don't get a radical change of plans or focus every year. Yes, you two have a point. But I think that some old members will always be re-elected (Maybe I'm wrong, but I think we can ignore this risk). And a public voting is probably a lot of work -- I don't want to organize that twice a year. And I prefer a "1 year stable group with people that know each other and know how to make compromises" over a "group that is shuffled and confused by new members every six months". BTW, does anyone know how Gnome or Debian handle this? Gnome elects the whole board once a year iirc. CU thl From andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de Mon Apr 24 07:20:04 2006 From: andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de (Andreas Bierfert) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 09:20:04 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060424092004.52f233d1@alkaid.a.lan> On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 16:26:35 -0400 "Jeff Spaleta" wrote: > With 1 year appointment terms I'd rather see elections of half of > fesco every 6 months. I don't think potentially turning over the > whole committee in a single election is a good idea for continuity of > purpose or long term planning issues. Yes this probably is a better idea then having a potentially new committee every year or so. Even with possible reelections which I think should be fine here as well. For the I think stuff should be automated. I agree that this is some work in the beginning but it should be easy enough to write up a webbased system which does this stuff more or less automatically for us. So what about the future for FESCO? I think what FESCO needs is this: - clear defined mission statement(s) - clear defined boundaries of power (what can 'they' do, what should 'they' do, whats a must do) Not that FESCOs job was not good or anything, thanks everybody for doing it, but as mentioned in other mails in this thread: I think that some people here in the community did not like the way FESCO was brought into power and if we really go democratic about it this time around acceptance will be a lot better and acceptance meaning both ways: from FESCO and towards FESCO. This is in general something we all need to work on: Not seeing FE as a played with project but as a player ;). Remember: We all do stuff on FE in our free time and this does not always give the best results that we could have. It is natural that some people do more and some people do less and I think we should really start to feel as a community who accepts this. Not meaning that everything you do here is ok but maybe having better communication an things. Not that this has been really bad in the future but I certainly could be improved and stressed. Ah well before I write to much about this: I am all for a democratic clear defined new FESCO. Thanks to everybody that was, is and probably will be member of FESCO and of course to those who get nominated (Hm do we get cool advertisement gadgets from them so we give them our vote? :P). -Andreas -- Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 173 5803043 | mail preferred -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tla-ml at rasmil.dk Mon Apr 24 07:30:13 2006 From: tla-ml at rasmil.dk (Tim Lauridsen) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 09:30:13 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <444C7E85.2040705@rasmil.dk> > Proposed plan: > > - Number of FESCo members in the future: 13 > This sounds like a good number. > - Everyone that wants to nominate him/herself for the next FESCo period > needs to write a self-nomination to fedora-extras-list (proposed date: > between 1. and 7. May 2006). It should at least answer this questions: > -- What important things did you do for Fedora in the past (in general > and specific to Extras) > -- What do you want to achieve during your time in FESCo? Please write a > short mission statement with goals, objectives, etc! > > Sound like a very good idea, if you want to enter FESCo, you must have a clear idea of there you want it to go and how you can contribute to make it go there. > - All people who maintain packages in Extras can vote for as many > members as they want to vote for (proposed date: between 9. and 14 May > 2006). > > - The top (n) vote-getters are in. > > - A new FESCo-chair is elected by the newly elected FESCo on the first > meeting (that would be 20. May 2006) > > - Next FESCo election round about four weeks after FC7 was published > > Big missing piece in this plan: How to actually vote? Does anyone have > experiences with E-Mail/Web voting system? How fast can such a voting > system be set up? How do we make sure that we can trust the results? > I don't think a vote is necessary, it is more important to get some members there: 1. Want the job :-)) 2. Have something to offer. ( Get some work done). 3. Have some clear ideas about where Extras should go in the future. Conclusion: 1. The current FESCo decides a number of member in the future. 2. The current FESCo should find out who want to stay and who want to leave. 3. People who want to get in should write a mission statement on this list, people can then comment on the candidates. 4. The current FESCo then decides what new member to include. 2. - 4. can be repeated every half year. By the way, I think that the current FESCo have done a great job, for the community. Tim Lauridsen Yumex Developer. From jeromesoyer at yahoo.fr Mon Apr 24 08:02:16 2006 From: jeromesoyer at yahoo.fr (SOYER Jerome) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 08:02:16 +0000 (GMT) Subject: iFolder server In-Reply-To: <444C46EB.5080607@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <20060424080216.91468.qmail@web25601.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hi, I'm interesting to work on it, but for Mandriva and Fedora, i use this two distro. Where can i find your srpms or the spec file ? Thks. ----- Message d'origine ---- De : Michael J. Knox ? : Discussion related to Fedora Extras Envoy? le : Lundi, 24 Avril 2006, 5h32mn 59s Objet : iFolder server Hey all, I have packaged up ifolder server, but I seem to be hitting some brick walls with the actual running of it. I wonder if anyone would be interested in helping package this with me? If so, drop me an email off list Thanks! Michael -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Mon Apr 24 11:37:38 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 13:37:38 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 23 Apr 2006 20:53:09 +0200." <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <200604241137.k3OBbcxx012109@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> fedora at leemhuis.info said: > Big missing piece in this plan: How to actually vote? Does anyone have > experiences with E-Mail/Web voting system? How fast can such a voting system > be set up? How do we make sure that we can trust the results? Well, we do have a list of people who have completed the cla, complete with their GPG key... So how about you produce an "official" list of eligible people, post it on f-e-l, then people tick off the ones they'd like to elect, sign the list and return it to some voting email address. Shouldn't then be too hard to process the signed lists to count the votes... Or did you intend to have anonymous voting ? Cheers, Christian From fedora at leemhuis.info Mon Apr 24 12:01:18 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:01:18 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <200604241137.k3OBbcxx012109@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200604241137.k3OBbcxx012109@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <1145880078.2442.9.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Montag, den 24.04.2006, 13:37 +0200 schrieb Christian.Iseli at licr.org: > fedora at leemhuis.info said: > > Big missing piece in this plan: How to actually vote? Does anyone have > > experiences with E-Mail/Web voting system? How fast can such a voting system > > be set up? How do we make sure that we can trust the results? > > Well, we do have a list of people who have completed the cla, complete with > their GPG key... > > So how about you produce an "official" list of eligible people, post it on > f-e-l, then people tick off the ones they'd like to elect, sign the list and > return it to some voting email address. > > Shouldn't then be too hard to process the signed lists to count the votes... Well, I would prefer a solution that works and is well tried already over one where we need to write scripts/webinterfaces/whatever. Debian and Gnome do votes somehow iirc and maybe it would be the easiest if we just could use the same software for Fedora Extras. > Or did you intend to have anonymous voting ? Good question. What would people prefer? CU thl From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Mon Apr 24 12:23:47 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:23:47 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:01:18 +0200." <1145880078.2442.9.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <200604241223.k3OCNlPf012869@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> fedora at leemhuis.info said: > Well, I would prefer a solution that works and is well tried already over one > where we need to write scripts/webinterfaces/whatever. Debian and Gnome do > votes somehow iirc and maybe it would be the easiest if we just could use the > same software for Fedora Extras. Sure, if you can get your hands on the voting system. If not, I'll be happy to help with my simple (email only) proposal. > > Or did you intend to have anonymous voting ? > Good question. What would people prefer? A non-anonymous vote is much simpler, and anyone can verify the outcome if they wish (just publish the signed ballots somewhere). So that'd be my preference. Christian From mpeters at mac.com Mon Apr 24 12:33:38 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 05:33:38 -0700 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145880078.2442.9.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <200604241137.k3OBbcxx012109@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1145880078.2442.9.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <1145882019.27140.22.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 14:01 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > Or did you intend to have anonymous voting ? > > Good question. What would people prefer? I would prefer the GPG signed method. It seems like the best way to ensure that there isn't ballot stuffing going on. From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Mon Apr 24 13:08:54 2006 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 08:08:54 -0500 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145882019.27140.22.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> References: <200604241137.k3OBbcxx012109@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1145880078.2442.9.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1145882019.27140.22.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> Message-ID: <20060424130853.GA3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 05:33:38AM -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote: > On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 14:01 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > > > > Or did you intend to have anonymous voting ? > > > > Good question. What would people prefer? > > I would prefer the GPG signed method. > It seems like the best way to ensure that there isn't ballot stuffing > going on. I agree. josh From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Mon Apr 24 13:11:35 2006 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 08:11:35 -0500 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145848352.25417.3.camel@cutter> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> <20060424024647.GA31508@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145848352.25417.3.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <20060424131135.GB3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:12:32PM -0400, seth vidal wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 21:46 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > > Yes, I agree. We want a mix of both old and new members at any one time. > > That way, we don't get a radical change of plans or focus every year. > > > > So, there are some members who want to leave FESCO at the moment. That is > > fine. Thank them for their contributions and let them go. Then elect > > enough members to make FESCO a governing body of 13. Then in 6 months, > > those that were there already have their term up and you elect another half. > > At the risk of sounding pessmistic - do we have 7 new people who > actually want the jobs? Also how do we handle the issue of security in > terms of the package-signing key during transitions? Clearly anyone > outgoing shouldn't keep access to the key. I believe the count in the last FESCO meeting turned out to be around that number. That's why I suggested much of the above :). As for the package-signing key issue... good question. I'd need to know more to suggest how to handle it though. I agree that once someone is out, they should not have access to the key any longer. josh From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Mon Apr 24 13:17:41 2006 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 08:17:41 -0500 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 08:53:09PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > "Whom"? -- The current FESCo has the problem that some people are > quite inactive. So I (and some others, too) want to lay the hurdle to > get into FESCo a bit higher to have more active members in the future. > Some quotes from the IRC-Meeting in that context > - "I think we should have people that 1) show up for meetings 2) are > active leaders in Extras." > - "I think merit is a good measure of who belongs in FESCO." > - "if people want to join FESCO, they should write their own mission > statement, goals, objectives, etc." > Current plan to achieve it: Everyone (also current FESCo members!) who > wants to be member of the next FESCo needs to nominate him/herself on > fedora-extras-list; in that self-nomination-mail everyone needs to lay > down some plans what he or she wants to achieve when elected for FESCo. > Of course all fedora extras maintainers are allowed to nominate other > people for FESCo -- but the potential candidates still have to do lay > down their plans own their own. One small question: Should people that are on the Fedora Project Board also be allowed in FESCO? I personally don't have an issue with that, but at first glance that would seem to be largely pointless. And as a side question, what role does FESCO have in conjunction with the Project Board, if any? > - How is the Chair elected? > We have two options here afaics: > -- the new FESCo elects a (new) chair > -- the one with most votes in the election is nominated as FESCo-Chair; > if he does not want to do the job the one with the seconds most votes > gets the job offered, .... I think election of the chair by the FESCO members seems the way to go. Whether or not that will work out, who knows. josh From dcbw at redhat.com Mon Apr 24 13:18:56 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 09:18:56 -0400 Subject: extras-buildsys/utils extras-sign-move.py,1.11,1.12 In-Reply-To: <1145818836.23350.1.camel@cutter> References: <200604231840.k3NIe3Xv009102@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <1145818540.16878.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1145818836.23350.1.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1145884736.2203.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 15:00 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 21:55 +0300, Ville Skytt? wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 11:40 -0700, Seth Vidal wrote: > > > > > Modified Files: > > > extras-sign-move.py > > > Log Message: > > > > > > if the file already exists, unlink it - this lets us sneak out silent > > > changes > > [...] > > > if not DEBUG: > > > + if os.path.exists(rpmloc): > > > + os.unlink(rpmloc) > > > shutil.copy2(package, rpmloc) > > > > Eh... rationale? We should be making sure that this _cannot_ happen, > > not make it easier or automatic. > > in this specific case I added it b/c some num-num updated their packages > w/o iterating the release. So we ended up with a conflict. If you'd like Ideally we should be gating this in the build system and fail packages that aren't "newer" than the last one built for a particular repository. Something I've wanted to do for a long time but, of course, requires some amount of yum-awareness in the build server. Which is in HEAD in rudimentary form. Dan From jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Apr 24 13:50:11 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 09:50:11 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <200604241223.k3OCNlPf012869@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <1145880078.2442.9.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <200604241223.k3OCNlPf012869@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <604aa7910604240650r6de07a09yd71b6b1810ece3d@mail.gmail.com> On 4/24/06, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > A non-anonymous vote is much simpler, and anyone can verify the outcome if they > wish (just publish the signed ballots somewhere). So that'd be my preference. But if you publish the ballots.. I won't be able to rig the elections. Trust me, you want me to rig the elections and you want me to take a small but reasonable kickback from the candidates that I select.. its in the best interest of the community. -jef"look at it this way, if the candidates don't want the job enough to bribe me to rig the election for them.. then they clearly don't care enough about the job"spaleta From rc040203 at freenet.de Mon Apr 24 14:01:54 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:01:54 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 08:17 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 08:53:09PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > "Whom"? -- The current FESCo has the problem that some people are > > quite inactive. So I (and some others, too) want to lay the hurdle to > > get into FESCo a bit higher to have more active members in the future. > > Some quotes from the IRC-Meeting in that context > > - "I think we should have people that 1) show up for meetings 2) are > > active leaders in Extras." > > - "I think merit is a good measure of who belongs in FESCO." > > - "if people want to join FESCO, they should write their own mission > > statement, goals, objectives, etc." > > Current plan to achieve it: Everyone (also current FESCo members!) who > > wants to be member of the next FESCo needs to nominate him/herself on > > fedora-extras-list; in that self-nomination-mail everyone needs to lay > > down some plans what he or she wants to achieve when elected for FESCo. > > Of course all fedora extras maintainers are allowed to nominate other > > people for FESCo -- but the potential candidates still have to do lay > > down their plans own their own. > > One small question: Should people that are on the Fedora Project Board > also be allowed in FESCO? IMO, this would largely depend on these people's roles, these organs' selfunderstandings and relationships. Questions like * Who governs whom? * Who supervises whom? * Is the FPB a 'supervisory board' and FESCO a 'board of directors'? * Is the fact we have "2 boards", a step to implementing a classical 2 chamber government model? * Is FESCo a subordinate board of FPB? etc. would have to be clarified. ATM, I think the FBS's role is too unclear and too uncooked to have an opinion on this. Only one thing is clear, both organs have been established by RH, with close to zero democratic involvement of the community ;-) > And as a side question, what role does FESCO have in conjunction with the > Project Board, if any? Exactly this is the point. Ralf From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Mon Apr 24 14:09:25 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 10:09:25 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> > Questions like I believe the org chart (if you will) looks like this: FPB fesco famsco fdsco *sco fesco runs extras. famsco runs the ambassdors project fdsco runs the docs projects fpb oversees all of it and tries to lead and facilitate plans that impact/involve all of them. -sv From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Mon Apr 24 14:13:26 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:13:26 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 24 Apr 2006 09:50:11 EDT." <604aa7910604240650r6de07a09yd71b6b1810ece3d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200604241413.k3OEDQAH014208@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> jspaleta at gmail.com said: > But if you publish the ballots.. I won't be able to rig the elections. Trust > me, you want me to rig the elections and you want me to take a small but > reasonable kickback from the candidates that I select.. its in the best > interest of the community. Ah, teamwork. I like that :-D From rc040203 at freenet.de Mon Apr 24 14:16:42 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:16:42 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 10:09 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > I believe the org chart (if you will) looks like this: > > FPB > fesco famsco fdsco *sco > > > > fesco runs extras. > famsco runs the ambassdors project > fdsco runs the docs projects > > fpb oversees all of it and tries to lead and facilitate plans that > impact/involve all of them. OK, => FESCO is a subordinate board of FPB => FPB is governing FESCO Now, with you being a member of both FESCO and FPB, please answer: * Are you FESCO's delegate/representative to FPB? * Did FESCO elect you as a member of FPB or has RH proclaimed/selected you? Ralf From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Mon Apr 24 14:29:21 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 10:29:21 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 16:16 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > OK, > > => FESCO is a subordinate board of FPB > => FPB is governing FESCO > > Now, with you being a member of both FESCO and FPB, please answer: > > * Are you FESCO's delegate/representative to FPB? nope - I'm just zees guy, you know? :) I am a member of fesco and a member of the board - I don't really see why there is a conflict of interest there. The goals of the board and of fesco are pretty much oriented in the same direction. I'm not the only duplicate member b/t the board and fesco, either. jeremy katz is on both, too, iirc. But jeremy is everywhere - he is the many-headed hydra :) > * Did FESCO elect you as a member of FPB or has RH proclaimed/selected > you? When the board was being selected I was asked if I would be willing to be one of the people from the community to serve on this, the first iteration, of the fedora project board. I agreed to do it. not much drama in it. -sv From katzj at redhat.com Mon Apr 24 14:55:04 2006 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 10:55:04 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1145890504.2402.4.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 10:29 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > jeremy katz is on both, too, iirc. But jeremy is everywhere - he is > the many-headed hydra :) I'm working on my ninja skills so that people are less likely to know where I'll pop up ;-) Jeremy From rc040203 at freenet.de Mon Apr 24 14:55:30 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:55:30 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 10:29 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 16:16 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > OK, > > > > => FESCO is a subordinate board of FPB > > => FPB is governing FESCO > > > > Now, with you being a member of both FESCO and FPB, please answer: > > > > * Are you FESCO's delegate/representative to FPB? > > nope Bad - Again, no democracy. > - I'm just zees guy, you know? :) > > I am a member of fesco and a member of the board - I don't really see > why there is a conflict of interest there. As you outlined, FPB is governing and directing FESCO. This is a conflict of interests. Your double-role would not be a problem if you had been elected/delegated, but you apparently have been not. > The goals of the board and of > fesco are pretty much oriented in the same direction. > > I'm not the only duplicate member b/t the board and fesco, either. > > jeremy katz is on both, too, iirc. But jeremy is everywhere - he is the > many-headed hydra :) I know, and it IS causing me headaches - Remember, we are not talking about particular persons, we are talking about roles, responsibilities, supervision, monitoring and control. > > * Did FESCO elect you as a member of FPB or has RH proclaimed/selected > > you? > > When the board was being selected I was asked if I would be willing to > be one of the people from the community to serve on this, the first > iteration, of the fedora project board. I agreed to do it. > > > not much drama in it. ATM, I am just asking questions to clarify things. Unfortunately, I sense no indication of democracy. Ralf From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Mon Apr 24 15:20:55 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 11:20:55 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1145892055.27889.20.camel@cutter> > > > * Are you FESCO's delegate/representative to FPB? > > > > nope > Bad - Again, no democracy. maybe I'm confused - where was the promise of democracy? I don't remember seeing one apriori the board coming together. > > As you outlined, FPB is governing and directing FESCO. > > This is a conflict of interests. Your double-role would not be a problem > if you had been elected/delegated, but you apparently have been not. I disagree, I see no conflict at all. moreover I don't see how election/delegation changes this. > I know, and it IS causing me headaches - Remember, we are not talking > about particular persons, we are talking about roles, responsibilities, > supervision, monitoring and control. But we are talking about particular people. I'm a particular person. > ATM, I am just asking questions to clarify things. Unfortunately, I > sense no indication of democracy. Again - where did the assumption of democracy come from? -sv From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Mon Apr 24 15:18:53 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:18:53 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:55:30 +0200." <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <200604241518.k3OFIrNl015035@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> rc040203 at freenet.de said: > ATM, I am just asking questions to clarify things. Unfortunately, I sense no > indication of democracy. If you dig a bit into world history, you'll probably see that democracy only appeared rather late in the process. Why would you think it'd be much different in Fedora ? I mean, it can probably be boiled down to a classical chicken/egg problem: first you need to create a community, and a community will only be created if there be some "icons" to draw people together. Before you can elect people to some role, you need a pool of interested people in said role... which will only be clearly defined after some iterative process. I think you need a bit more patience... Christian From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Mon Apr 24 15:26:44 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 11:26:44 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145890504.2402.4.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890504.2402.4.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1145892405.27889.22.camel@cutter> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 10:55 -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote: > On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 10:29 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > jeremy katz is on both, too, iirc. But jeremy is everywhere - he is > > the many-headed hydra :) > > I'm working on my ninja skills so that people are less likely to know > where I'll pop up ;-) > a many-headed ninja hydra. special. -sv From paul at city-fan.org Mon Apr 24 15:25:15 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:25:15 +0100 Subject: Sponsorship process In-Reply-To: <1145713160.2336.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <4449E9A0.3070508@hhs.nl> <1145702898.12160.15.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <1145713160.2336.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1145892316.5950.25.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 15:39 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Samstag, den 22.04.2006, 11:48 +0100 schrieb Paul Howarth: > > On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 10:30 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > First of all thanks to FESco for trusting me and making me a sponsor. > > > With that said, I just started reading > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SponsorProcess > > Looks like the page is need of a few tweaks :-) > > Well, it's a wiki -- feel free to change things. Yes, those pages are > more important than others and we need to be careful that they remain > read- and understandable. But I still think every contributor is free to > add things. Just be more careful. OK. I'm familiar with editing the wiki but some pages are rather more "official" than others; I wouldn't dream of editing the package review guidelines page to suit my personal preferences for instance, however appealing the thought might be at times :-) > [...] > > Another change I'd suggest is to: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors > > > > There is a section on mailing lists to join, after which it says: > > > > Read Other Submissions > > Read some other package submissions to learn about packaging and gain > > familiarity with the process and requirements. > > > > I'd add to this that joining the read-only fedora-package-review mailing > > list (not included in the aforementioned section on mailing lists) is a > > good way to see the process in action for other submissions. > > Go ahead :-) Done. Paul. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 24 15:19:54 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 11:19:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604241519.k3OFJsHd016189@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emacs-muse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-04-24 11:19 EST ------- No it wouldn't. There is no real problem for a single source RPM of any name to spit out binary packages of any names. I think we need to be promoting consistency in package namespaces. I propose that we bring this to the next Fedora Extras Steering comittee meeting for discussion. Meanwhile if anyone else has opinions please speak up. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From rc040203 at freenet.de Mon Apr 24 15:36:37 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:36:37 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145892055.27889.20.camel@cutter> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145892055.27889.20.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1145892997.986.175.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 11:20 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > > > * Are you FESCO's delegate/representative to FPB? > > > > > > nope > > Bad - Again, no democracy. > > maybe I'm confused - where was the promise of democracy? > > ATM, I am just asking questions to clarify things. Unfortunately, I > > sense no indication of democracy. > > Again - where did the assumption of democracy come from? Then, I don't see any use in continuing this discussion. Thorsten, why did you ask? It's apparent, the current system is not interested in democracy. Ralf From tibbs at math.uh.edu Mon Apr 24 15:38:50 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 10:38:50 -0500 Subject: Erlang package naming Message-ID: I think this is the first Erlang package in Extras: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188207 Am I wrong to interpret the naming guidelines to say that this package should be named erlang-esdl instead of just esdl? What about the Provides: esdl bit? Since this is the first Erlang package there aren't any guidelines to follow, but "esdl" seems awfully generic to me and there's already been at least one naming clash. (The poor Eiffel folks had to rename their SDL module.) Unfortunately other distros have chosen (poorly, IMHO) to just call it "esdl", so either way there's a conflict. - J< From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Mon Apr 24 15:42:58 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 11:42:58 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145892997.986.175.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145892055.27889.20.camel@cutter> <1145892997.986.175.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1145893378.27889.35.camel@cutter> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 17:36 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 11:20 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > > > > * Are you FESCO's delegate/representative to FPB? > > > > > > > > nope > > > Bad - Again, no democracy. > > > > maybe I'm confused - where was the promise of democracy? > > > > ATM, I am just asking questions to clarify things. Unfortunately, I > > > sense no indication of democracy. > > > > Again - where did the assumption of democracy come from? > Then, I don't see any use in continuing this discussion. > > Thorsten, why did you ask? It's apparent, the current system is not > interested in democracy. I didn't say there wasn't interest. Just that there was no promise that it would, from the start, be democratic. As others have mentioned - it never starts that way. Democracy evolves. Thorsten's suggestion is an excellent evolutionary step toward electing members to fesco. -sv From rc040203 at freenet.de Mon Apr 24 15:40:09 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:40:09 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <200604241518.k3OFIrNl015035@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200604241518.k3OFIrNl015035@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <1145893210.986.180.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 17:18 +0200, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > rc040203 at freenet.de said: > > ATM, I am just asking questions to clarify things. Unfortunately, I sense no > > indication of democracy. > > If you dig a bit into world history, you'll probably see that democracy only > appeared rather late in the process. 13 years, 40 years and 80 years are the most prominent examples. > I think you need a bit more patience... Yes, I am well aware, some people are never going to learn from history. Ralf From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Mon Apr 24 15:46:07 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 11:46:07 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145893210.986.180.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <200604241518.k3OFIrNl015035@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1145893210.986.180.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1145893568.27889.37.camel@cutter> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 17:40 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 17:18 +0200, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > > rc040203 at freenet.de said: > > > ATM, I am just asking questions to clarify things. Unfortunately, I sense no > > > indication of democracy. > > > > If you dig a bit into world history, you'll probably see that democracy only > > appeared rather late in the process. > 13 years, 40 years and 80 years are the most prominent examples. And in terms of having functional community involvement Fedora has really only had extras working since a few months after FC3 was released. So we've been waiting all of what? 16 months? We're doing pretty well by the above standards, then. -sv From mattdm at mattdm.org Mon Apr 24 16:06:19 2006 From: mattdm at mattdm.org (Matthew Miller) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 12:06:19 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145892055.27889.20.camel@cutter> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145892055.27889.20.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <20060424160619.GA10428@jadzia.bu.edu> On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 11:20:55AM -0400, seth vidal wrote: > But we are talking about particular people. > I'm a particular person. Very particular. -- Matthew Miller mattdm at mattdm.org Boston University Linux ------> From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Mon Apr 24 16:12:43 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 12:12:43 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <20060424160619.GA10428@jadzia.bu.edu> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145892055.27889.20.camel@cutter> <20060424160619.GA10428@jadzia.bu.edu> Message-ID: <1145895163.27889.42.camel@cutter> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 12:06 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 11:20:55AM -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > But we are talking about particular people. > > I'm a particular person. > > Very particular. hey, hey, hey - no name calling. except for referring to jeremy as a many-headed ninja hydra. but I think he likes that :) -sv From mattdm at mattdm.org Mon Apr 24 16:14:18 2006 From: mattdm at mattdm.org (Matthew Miller) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 12:14:18 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145895163.27889.42.camel@cutter> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145892055.27889.20.camel@cutter> <20060424160619.GA10428@jadzia.bu.edu> <1145895163.27889.42.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <20060424161418.GB10428@jadzia.bu.edu> On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 12:12:43PM -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > > But we are talking about particular people. > > > I'm a particular person. > > Very particular. > hey, hey, hey - no name calling. > except for referring to jeremy as a many-headed ninja hydra. > but I think he likes that :) :) -- Matthew Miller mattdm at mattdm.org Boston University Linux ------> From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 24 16:14:51 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 12:14:51 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604241614.k3OGEpk1028706@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emacs-muse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 ------- Additional Comments From jonathan.underwood at gmail.com 2006-04-24 12:14 EST ------- Hi Warren - I agree, there's no real problem, technically - in fact, that's what I've done. I'm just worried from the user perspective. Perhaps I am worrying too much though, given that the user would have to install muse and emacs-muse (and/or xemacs-muse) and so should know to look for a module called muse and not emacs-muse. I would like to add though, that I think the approach used here (muse, emacs-muse, xemacs-muse from a muse srcrpm) is much more preferable to having muse muse-emacs and muse-xemacs which is what the mew model would give. Prepending the interpreter is following the current guidelines. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Mon Apr 24 16:55:46 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 18:55:46 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145848352.25417.3.camel@cutter> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> <20060424024647.GA31508@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145848352.25417.3.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <20060424185546.087d42a8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 23:12:32 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > Also how do we handle the issue of security in > terms of the package-signing key during transitions? Clearly anyone > outgoing shouldn't keep access to the key. "Clearly"? At present, not everybody in FESCO has access to the sign/push scripts or the master repository. Access was granted based on an established level of trust, wasn't it? If people in FESCO are replaced, do you really want to throw away such an establishment? Wow! That's a step backwards IMO. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Mon Apr 24 17:01:12 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 19:01:12 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20060424190112.4cf0ab3b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:01:54 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > ATM, I think the FBS's role is too unclear and too uncooked to have an > opinion on this. Only one thing is clear, both organs have been > established by RH, with close to zero democratic involvement of the > community ;-) > > > And as a side question, what role does FESCO have in conjunction with the > > Project Board, if any? > Exactly this is the point. There are more questions like those from Ralf I have not quoted. Some I've posted to the internal list some time ago. I'm somewhat bored that only a few people inside/outside FESCO comment on such topics. So this time I'm going to wait for more comments before picking up pieces from my old message. FESCO's role, FESCO's power inside the Fedora Project, FESCO's responsibilities, FESCO members' responsibilities and duties are not clear either yet. From wtogami at redhat.com Mon Apr 24 17:29:19 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 13:29:19 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <444C44A2.2070405@knox.net.nz> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> <20060424024647.GA31508@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145848352.25417.3.camel@cutter> <444C44A2.2070405@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <444D0AEF.2030206@redhat.com> Michael J. Knox wrote: > I would certainly be interested in taking part in FESCO, though I doubt > my current level of presence and suitability in Fedora Extras is > probably not up to par with others, but I do think you would find the > right people easily enough. > Note that FESCo meetings have been an open "town hall" style weekly gathering in #fedora-extras where anybody can and does participate. The best way to show that you belong on FESCo is to give good opinions in package reviews, submit many good packages, participate in the FESCo meetings, and/or work on Fedora Extras related infrastructure. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From wtogami at redhat.com Mon Apr 24 17:32:21 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 13:32:21 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145853354.18962.7.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> <20060424024647.GA31508@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145853354.18962.7.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <444D0BA5.7060407@redhat.com> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Yes, you two have a point. But I think that some old members will always > be re-elected (Maybe I'm wrong, but I think we can ignore this risk). > > And a public voting is probably a lot of work -- I don't want to > organize that twice a year. And I prefer a "1 year stable group with > people that know each other and know how to make compromises" over a > "group that is shuffled and confused by new members every six months". > > BTW, does anyone know how Gnome or Debian handle this? Gnome elects the > whole board once a year iirc. > > CU > thl > In my opinion, we don't need to expire people for time reasons. It is unnecessary overhead to go through this just for the sake of having elections. Instead we should expire people voluntarily or if they haven't actually done anything. That alone would open many spots and allow fresh blood in. People should vote in new members if they have earned respect of fellow community members. Generally this requires doing things in Extras. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 24 18:05:09 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:05:09 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060424180509.82FA415212A@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 5 fbida-2.03-4.fc3 munin-1.2.4-8.fc3 perl-Curses-1.13-3.fc3 quilt-0.45-1.fc3 stripesnoop-1.5-5.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 24 18:06:14 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:06:14 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060424180614.5DE9315212A@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 17 anjuta-1.2.4a-1.fc4 anthy-7500b-1.fc4 archmage-0.0.7-1.fc4 fbida-2.03-6.fc4 ghc-6.4.2-1.fc4 hugs98-2005.03-1.fc4 hugs98-2005.03-4.fc4 iperf-2.0.2-1.fc4 libedit-2.9-2.20060213cvs.fc4 munin-1.2.4-8.fc4 perl-Algorithm-Dependency-1.102-1.fc4 perl-Curses-1.13-3.fc4 perl-Net-Server-0.90-1.fc4 perl-Net-Server-0.93-1.fc4 poker-eval-130.0-4.fc4 poker-eval-130.0-5.fc4 quilt-0.45-1.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 24 18:07:45 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:07:45 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060424180745.A719415212A@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 15 anjuta-1.2.4a-1.fc5 archmage-0.0.7-1.fc5 dejavu-fonts-2.5.0-2.fc5 fbida-2.03-11.fc5 hugs98-2005.03-4.fc5 iperf-2.0.2-1.fc5 libedit-2.9-2.20060213cvs.fc5 munin-1.2.4-8.fc5 perl-Algorithm-Dependency-1.102-1.fc5 perl-Curses-1.13-3.fc5 perl-Net-Server-0.90-2.fc5 perl-Net-Server-0.93-1.fc5 poker-eval-130.0-4.fc5 poker-eval-130.0-5.fc5 quilt-0.45-1.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Mon Apr 24 18:08:11 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:08:11 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060424180811.2125515212A@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 16 anjuta-1.2.4a-1.fc6 anjuta-gdl-0.6.0-5.fc6 aspell-he-0.9-2.fc6 fbida-2.03-11.fc6 glib-1.2.10-20.fc6 hugs98-2005.03-4.fc6 iperf-2.0.2-1.fc6 libchmxx-0.1-2.fc6 libedit-2.9-2.20060213cvs.fc6 libfwbuilder-2.0.12-2.fc6 munin-1.2.4-8.fc6 perl-Algorithm-Dependency-1.102-1.fc6 perl-Curses-1.13-3.fc6 perl-Net-Server-0.93-1.fc6 poker-eval-130.0-5.fc6 quilt-0.45-1.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 24 18:13:23 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:13:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179852] FC4 buildsys fails - FC4 mock succeeds - wine-docs package In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604241813.k3OIDNIY024413@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: FC4 buildsys fails - FC4 mock succeeds - wine-docs package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179852 ------- Additional Comments From williams at redhat.com 2006-04-24 14:12 EST ------- I duplicated the failure last week on a plague system running FC5. mock-0.4-8.fc5 plague-0.4.4.1-1.fc5 plague-builder-0.4.4.1-1.fc5 I can cut the mock invocation line out of the debug output and run it directly with no failure, but the plague build dies with the mysterious elinks message "ELinks: Unknown file type". Looking at the elinks source (src/encoding/encoding.c), the only place this message can be generated is if elinks was told to operate on a non-regular file and the file isn't stdin as a pipe and an option to allow special files isn't set: } else if (!S_ISREG(stt.st_mode) && !is_stdin_pipe(&stt, filename) && !get_opt_bool("protocol.file.allow_special_files")) { state = S_FILE_TYPE; } I'd like to figure out on what file elinks is operating on and why that file is different in a buildsystem chroot, but I'm not sure how best to do that. I also haven't tracked down whether somehow the option is different in a mock and a plague chroot. Suggestions welcome. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 24 19:02:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 15:02:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 179852] FC4 buildsys fails - FC4 mock succeeds - wine-docs package In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604241902.k3OJ2aY8009962@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: FC4 buildsys fails - FC4 mock succeeds - wine-docs package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179852 ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2006-04-24 15:02 EST ------- elinks is used as the html2txt backend by docbook2txt ( /usr/share/sgml/docbook/utils-0.6.14/backends/txt ) like the following: links -dump /tmp/something.html > something.txt -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Mon Apr 24 22:39:45 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 22:39:45 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-24 Message-ID: <20060424223945.5101.95995@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 sqlite-tcl 2.8.16-1.i386 stripesnoop-devel 1.5-2.fc3.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 sqlite-tcl 2.8.16-1.x86_64 stripesnoop-devel 1.5-2.fc3.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: stripesnoop-devel - 1.5-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: stripesnoop = 0:1.5-2.fc3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: sqlite-tcl - 2.8.16-1.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: sqlite = 0:2.8.16-1 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: sqlite-tcl - 2.8.16-1.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: sqlite = 0:2.8.16-1 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: stripesnoop-devel - 1.5-2.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: stripesnoop = 0:1.5-2.fc3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Mon Apr 24 22:39:47 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 22:39:47 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-24 Message-ID: <20060424223947.5104.53892@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.0.0-3.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.0.0-3.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9()(64bit) package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.0.0-3.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Mon Apr 24 22:39:52 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 22:39:52 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-24 Message-ID: <20060424223952.5106.78308@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 up-imapproxy 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0 libobby-0.3.so.0 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomeui.so.32 libzvt.so.2 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libglade libgnomeui.so.32 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libcrypto.so.5 libssl.so.5 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libcrypto.so.5()(64bit) libssl.so.5()(64bit) package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libobby-0.3.so.0()(64bit) package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) gnome-libs libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libglade libgnomeui.so.32 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: up-imapproxy - 1.2.4-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libcrypto.so.5 libssl.so.5 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomeui.so.32 libzvt.so.2 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0 libobby-0.3.so.0 From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Mon Apr 24 22:46:41 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:46:41 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 24 Apr 2006 13:32:21 EDT." <444D0BA5.7060407@redhat.com> Message-ID: <200604242246.k3OMkmUi024910@mx3.redhat.com> wtogami at redhat.com said: > In my opinion, we don't need to expire people for time reasons. It is > unnecessary overhead to go through this just for the sake of having > elections. > Instead we should expire people voluntarily or if they haven't actually done > anything. That alone would open many spots and allow fresh blood in. > People should vote in new members if they have earned respect of fellow > community members. Generally this requires doing things in Extras. In principle, what you propose will happen naturaly when FESCo members get elected by a general vote: - those that want to leave are free to go - those that do actual work in Extras and are deemed generaly useful will be re-elected - those that haven't done anything do not stand much chance to be re-elected (provided there are enough candidates, of course) In city councils around here, people get elected every 4 years. Evidently, some will leave before the 4 year period is over. A council counts 50 people, so those are the 50 that got the more votes, but the 10 next people are remembered (called "viennent ensuite", i.e., follow up) and are instated as council members as needed when one of the existing members decides to leave. For FESCo, I think one vote per year would be reasonable: leaves some time to get actual project underway, but is not overly long. Elect 13 members plus a few spares, and use the spares when someone wants to retire. If too many decide to leave, you can still decide if an early vote is needed, or if you go on with less members for a while. I also do not see any rule that says *all* FESCo members must be elected. Maybe a few could be delegates from the Fedora Project Board, to ensure some consistency. Anyway, just my CHF 0.02 ... Cheers, Christian From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Apr 24 23:31:21 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 19:31:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604242331.k3ONVLJh022179@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emacs-muse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 ------- Additional Comments From tagoh at redhat.com 2006-04-24 19:31 EST ------- Can we ponder the bytecompiling at the install time before doing this? - Does someone wants to spam bugs when one imports a flavor of emacsen like emacs22, SXEmacs etc etc, and all elisp packages needs to be reworked then? It sounds like the unnecessary work to me. changing the package name to emacs- should be still valid idea though, I suspect that we don't need an extra work to add subpackages for a flavor of emacsen at all. Could someone explain me the significant reason why we have to provide the bytecompiled packages for each flavor of emacsen rather than bytecompiling at the install time? - We didn't just need to care of others when we didn't work the community together, because we didn't have any plans to ship other emacsen any more. but now, we have a chance to do it. current approach isn't comfortable to do it and it imposes a burden on all elisp maintainers. I'd propose this again. TIA, -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From tcallawa at redhat.com Tue Apr 25 00:12:50 2006 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom 'spot' Callaway) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 19:12:50 -0500 Subject: Header files in Perl packages In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1145923971.22894.40.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 14:22 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > Some Perl packages install header files deep into the internal Perl > directory hierarchy. I guess these are used for something internal to > Perl. Some packages which do this are perl-PDL, Gtk-Perl, perl-DBI > (and now perl-cairo, > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187799). > > The packaging guidelines state: > > - MUST: Header files or static libraries must be in a -devel package. > > but it seems pointless to put two header files in a separate -devel > package when they aren't intended to be included from user-written > code. I suppose it's possible that Perl needs to have them present to > run. > > Is this situation a valid exception to the above MUST? Ehhh... let me look at the situation here. I'm inclined to say no, but they might mean something different to perl. ~spot -- Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Senior Sales Engineer || GPG ID: 93054260 Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices) Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my! From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 25 00:36:45 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 12:36:45 +1200 Subject: taking ownership of screem Message-ID: <444D6F1D.3080406@knox.net.nz> If there is no objection, I will take ownership of screem. This package has been noted as one with out a maintainer. Michael From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Tue Apr 25 00:45:50 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 20:45:50 -0400 Subject: taking ownership of screem In-Reply-To: <444D6F1D.3080406@knox.net.nz> References: <444D6F1D.3080406@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <1145925950.31773.0.camel@cutter> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 12:36 +1200, Michael J Knox wrote: > If there is no objection, I will take ownership of screem. > > This package has been noted as one with out a maintainer. > I screem, you screem, we all screem for your to take over screem! :) /me runs -sv From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 25 00:54:52 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 12:54:52 +1200 Subject: taking ownership of screem In-Reply-To: <1145925950.31773.0.camel@cutter> References: <444D6F1D.3080406@knox.net.nz> <1145925950.31773.0.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <444D735C.1080206@knox.net.nz> seth vidal wrote: > On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 12:36 +1200, Michael J Knox wrote: >> If there is no objection, I will take ownership of screem. >> >> This package has been noted as one with out a maintainer. >> > > I screem, you screem, we all screem for your to take over screem! > > :) > > /me runs lol.. slow day ? ;) Michael From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Tue Apr 25 00:59:30 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 20:59:30 -0400 Subject: taking ownership of screem In-Reply-To: <444D735C.1080206@knox.net.nz> References: <444D6F1D.3080406@knox.net.nz> <1145925950.31773.0.camel@cutter> <444D735C.1080206@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <1145926770.31773.6.camel@cutter> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 12:54 +1200, Michael J Knox wrote: > seth vidal wrote: > > On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 12:36 +1200, Michael J Knox wrote: > >> If there is no objection, I will take ownership of screem. > >> > >> This package has been noted as one with out a maintainer. > >> > > > > I screem, you screem, we all screem for your to take over screem! > > > > :) > > > > /me runs > > lol.. slow day ? ;) long, actually.. :) -sv From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 25 02:05:12 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 14:05:12 +1200 Subject: taking ownership of gnome-themes-extras Message-ID: <444D83D8.1030406@knox.net.nz> If there is no objection, I would like to claim gnome-themes-extras... /me wonders if Seth will rhythm with that ;) Michael From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 25 02:10:40 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 22:10:40 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604250210.k3P2AeRo019309@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emacs-muse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2006-04-24 22:10 EST ------- What if I install emacs, then some packages, then xemacs? Some thought needs to do into how this would work. Triggers? The base package for each emacs flavor could byte-compile everything in sight when it is installed and then each subpackage could compile itself for each installed emaacs flavor. But those packages would have to %ghost a lot of files so they properly uninstall all of the compiled versions that they might not even know about. And the issue of compatibility between packages and the various emacs flavors would make things terribly complicated. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From mpeters at mac.com Tue Apr 25 02:28:44 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 19:28:44 -0700 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <200604242246.k3OMkmUi024910@mx3.redhat.com> References: <200604242246.k3OMkmUi024910@mx3.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1145932125.19354.23.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 00:46 +0200, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > > I also do not see any rule that says *all* FESCo members must be elected. > Maybe a few could be delegates from the Fedora Project Board, to ensure some > consistency. I like that idea. I think there should be more elected than appointed, but four appointed and nine elected is a good balance. There is some guidance in the appointed members as necessary, but they are outnumbered by the community elected by enough that they can't bulldoze how things are run. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 25 03:14:10 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 23:14:10 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604250314.k3P3EAGk003988@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emacs-muse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 ------- Additional Comments From tagoh at redhat.com 2006-04-24 23:13 EST ------- If we use the same things what Debian does, we don't rely on the trigger at all, which may mess up ;) For the reference, http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/debian-emacs-policy especially see section 6. emacsen-common provides a facility to do byte-compile for every flavor of emacsen. What the elisp packages needs to do is, just to call emacs-package-install/emacs-package-remove in %post/%postun. and emacs-install/emacs-remove is for emacsen itself and to byte-compile all elisp available on system. it's useful when additional emacsen is installed on system and noone needs to install another package to use on it nor noone even needs to build another subpackage for that. So I don't think any packages need to do %ghost. packagers just needs to prepare the install/remove script and put it under /usr/lib/emacsen-common/packages/{install,remove}/, also just include all necessary elisp packages in rpm. that's it. you will miss the feature that queries the byte-compiled elisp files to rpm to know which package owns it though, I don't think it's an issue. For the compatibility, you can just exclude the incompatible flavor of emacsen in install script. Debian packages ordinarily does it as needed. HTH -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From cweyl at alumni.drew.edu Tue Apr 25 03:43:31 2006 From: cweyl at alumni.drew.edu (Chris Weyl) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 20:43:31 -0700 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <444D0BA5.7060407@redhat.com> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> <20060424024647.GA31508@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145853354.18962.7.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <444D0BA5.7060407@redhat.com> Message-ID: <7dd7ab490604242043i7da8ddcy5f8986aff60f2465@mail.gmail.com> On 4/24/06, Warren Togami wrote: > In my opinion, we don't need to expire people for time reasons. It is > unnecessary overhead to go through this just for the sake of having > elections. > > Instead we should expire people voluntarily or if they haven't actually > done anything. That alone would open many spots and allow fresh blood in. > > People should vote in new members if they have earned respect of fellow > community members. Generally this requires doing things in Extras. That brings to mind an (potentially) interesting thought -- the concept of a California-style "recall election." Sort of a two-pronged vote: first, "should X remain on FESCo?", second "Who should serve on FESCo?" Essentially, a vote of confidence followed by votes for different candidates; those losing their seats under the first part would be replaced by those in the second part. That being said... I'd second the call for staggered terms, regardless of appointed, elected, chosen by the Great Pumpkin. Stability and continuity of membership in an organization where so much is transmitted and done day to day by (mostly) volunteers is essential for the continued efficacy of such an institution; both internally and in its relations with the outside world. We ought to support it institutionally when possible. -Chris -- Chris Weyl Ex astris, scientia From fedora at leemhuis.info Tue Apr 25 04:52:12 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 06:52:12 +0200 Subject: Sponsorship process In-Reply-To: <1145892316.5950.25.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> References: <4449E9A0.3070508@hhs.nl> <1145702898.12160.15.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <1145713160.2336.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1145892316.5950.25.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> Message-ID: <1145940732.8204.9.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Montag, den 24.04.2006, 16:25 +0100 schrieb Paul Howarth: > On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 15:39 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Samstag, den 22.04.2006, 11:48 +0100 schrieb Paul Howarth: > > > On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 10:30 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > First of all thanks to FESco for trusting me and making me a sponsor. > > > > With that said, I just started reading > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SponsorProcess > > > Looks like the page is need of a few tweaks :-) > > > > Well, it's a wiki -- feel free to change things. Yes, those pages are > > more important than others and we need to be careful that they remain > > read- and understandable. But I still think every contributor is free to > > add things. Just be more careful. > OK. I'm familiar with editing the wiki but some pages are rather more > "official" than others; I wouldn't dream of editing the package review > guidelines page to suit my personal preferences for instance, however > appealing the thought might be at times :-) Well, there are always some people that look closer at the changes made to the wiki. So just adding "personal preferences" will probably be noticed and reverted ;-) Now more official: There are pages that are 'more "official" than others'. If you want to make changes to it but are not sure if they are proper prepare a diff offline and send it by mail to one of the people that changed the page often in the past. Ask him if these changes are okay. Maybe that person will apply them directly to the wiki, maybe he'll say "the changes are okay, go ahead and apply it yourself" That okay for everybody? > > [...] > > > I'd add to this that joining the read-only fedora-package-review mailing > > > list (not included in the aforementioned section on mailing lists) is a > > > good way to see the process in action for other submissions. > > Go ahead :-) > Done. thx CU thl From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Tue Apr 25 05:06:50 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 01:06:50 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <20060424185546.087d42a8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> <20060424024647.GA31508@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145848352.25417.3.camel@cutter> <20060424185546.087d42a8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1145941611.31773.48.camel@cutter> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 18:55 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 23:12:32 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > > Also how do we handle the issue of security in > > terms of the package-signing key during transitions? Clearly anyone > > outgoing shouldn't keep access to the key. > > "Clearly"? > > At present, not everybody in FESCO has access to the sign/push scripts or > the master repository. Access was granted based on an established level of > trust, wasn't it? If people in FESCO are replaced, do you really want to > throw away such an establishment? Wow! That's a step backwards IMO. I don't understand what you mean here. I think we've got some sort of miscommunication. Here's what I'm saying: we have N signers right now. At some point it is conceivable that one of the signers will stop working on the project. I do not mean anything about the people leaving FESCO - I mean about the people leaving the group of signers. -sv From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de Tue Apr 25 05:28:29 2006 From: enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de (Enrico Scholz) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 07:28:29 +0200 Subject: Buildsystem broken; no %_initrddir macro? Message-ID: <87acaaql4y.fsf@kosh.bigo.ensc.de> Hello, packages which built a week ago are now failing with errors like | Error: could not make srpm for clamav-0_88_1-2_fc6 - output was: | error: line 92: Dependency tokens must begin with alpha-numeric, '_' or '/': Requires(pre): %_initrddir http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=8256 Does the rpm version on the builder not know %_initrddir anymore? Enrico -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 480 bytes Desc: not available URL: From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Tue Apr 25 05:33:42 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 01:33:42 -0400 Subject: Buildsystem broken; no %_initrddir macro? In-Reply-To: <87acaaql4y.fsf@kosh.bigo.ensc.de> References: <87acaaql4y.fsf@kosh.bigo.ensc.de> Message-ID: <1145943222.31773.70.camel@cutter> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 07:28 +0200, Enrico Scholz wrote: > Hello, > > packages which built a week ago are now failing with errors like > > | Error: could not make srpm for clamav-0_88_1-2_fc6 - output was: > | error: line 92: Dependency tokens must begin with alpha-numeric, '_' or '/': Requires(pre): %_initrddir > > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=8256 > > > Does the rpm version on the builder not know %_initrddir anymore? it's not the rpm version on the builder - it's the rpm version on the build master. the os changed this last week and the rpm version is not what it used to be. Ville filed a bug about it and we're working on a solution in the short term. A longer term solution is to make sure we're always in a chroot environment even for the srpm construction. -sv From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 25 05:33:48 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 01:33:48 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604250533.k3P5Xm8u008567@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emacs-muse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|ville.skytta at iki.fi | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-25 01:33 EST ------- (Removing myself from Cc, three mails of every change here is a bit much...) FWIW, I'm not a fan of the byte-compile-in-%post idea. For example: no other packages (eg. python) do that either, it will cause problems with %{_netsharedpath} and read-only /usr/share mounts, and local *Emacs configurations may affect the byte-compilation possibly resulting in hard to debug issues. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Tue Apr 25 06:07:55 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:07:55 +0200 Subject: Sponsorship process In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 25 Apr 2006 06:52:12 +0200." <1145940732.8204.9.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <200604250608.k3P68A7V021583@mx3.redhat.com> fedora at leemhuis.info said: > Now more official: There are pages that are 'more "official" than others'. If > you want to make changes to it but are not sure if they are proper prepare a > diff offline and send it by mail to one of the people that changed the page > often in the past. Ask him if these changes are okay. Maybe that person will > apply them directly to the wiki, maybe he'll say "the changes are okay, go > ahead and apply it yourself" > That okay for everybody? Sounds good to me. That should make it easier for people not daring to touch some pages to actualy propose some useful changes. Christian From ville.skytta at iki.fi Tue Apr 25 06:32:50 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 09:32:50 +0300 Subject: Buildsystem broken; no %_initrddir macro? In-Reply-To: <1145943222.31773.70.camel@cutter> References: <87acaaql4y.fsf@kosh.bigo.ensc.de> <1145943222.31773.70.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1145946770.2639.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 01:33 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 07:28 +0200, Enrico Scholz wrote: > > > > Does the rpm version on the builder not know %_initrddir anymore? > > it's not the rpm version on the builder - it's the rpm version on the > build master. > > the os changed this last week and the rpm version is not what it used to > be. Ville filed a bug about it and we're working on a solution in the > short term. > > A longer term solution is to make sure we're always in a chroot > environment even for the srpm construction. For reference, the bug is https://bugzilla.redhat.com/189714 From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 25 06:49:09 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 02:49:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604250649.k3P6n957027563@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emacs-muse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 ------- Additional Comments From tagoh at redhat.com 2006-04-25 02:48 EST ------- Are there any yet-another python implementation? someone may still wants to use older release of python though, it sounds to me like it's a little different case, and even if someone does support byte-compiling installation for python, it may be less worth efforts. For %{_netsharedpath} and read-only /usr/share mounts, it could just stops to do byte-compiling if installation path is included in %{_netsharedpath} since rpm won't do anything. so it should be general issue but not specific issue. or can you explain me much more details that is likely case? Also, you will have to do byte-compile with --no-init-file --no-site-file, of course. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 25 07:30:21 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 19:30:21 +1200 Subject: homes for the homeless. Message-ID: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> I am willing to take ownership of the following orphaned packages: doctorj gnome-password-generator gnome-telnet gurlchecker prozilla putty sodipodi If there is no objection, I will assume ownership in the next day or two. Michael From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Tue Apr 25 07:35:34 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 09:35:34 +0200 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <444DD146.9080202@hhs.nl> Cool, Take notice that prozilla as inFE is ancient upstream has a much much newer version. Regards, Hans Michael J Knox wrote: > I am willing to take ownership of the following orphaned packages: > > doctorj > gnome-password-generator > gnome-telnet > gurlchecker > prozilla > putty > sodipodi > > If there is no objection, I will assume ownership in the next day or two. > > Michael > From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 25 07:46:05 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 19:46:05 +1200 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <444DD146.9080202@hhs.nl> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> <444DD146.9080202@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <444DD3BD.3020406@knox.net.nz> Yeah, I have doubled checked upstreams before emailing the list. The only real ?? is on gnome-telnet whos site seems to be down atm. Michael Hans de Goede wrote: > Cool, > > Take notice that prozilla as inFE is ancient upstream has a much much > newer version. > > Regards, > > Hans > > > Michael J Knox wrote: >> I am willing to take ownership of the following orphaned packages: >> >> doctorj >> gnome-password-generator >> gnome-telnet >> gurlchecker >> prozilla >> putty >> sodipodi >> >> If there is no objection, I will assume ownership in the next day or two. >> >> Michael >> > From mpeters at mac.com Tue Apr 25 07:56:04 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:56:04 -0700 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <444DD3BD.3020406@knox.net.nz> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> <444DD146.9080202@hhs.nl> <444DD3BD.3020406@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <1145951765.19354.44.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 19:46 +1200, Michael J Knox wrote: > Yeah, I have doubled checked upstreams before emailing the list. The > only real ?? is on gnome-telnet whos site seems to be down atm. They probably had their telnet session sniffed and got hacked ;) From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 25 08:52:55 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:52:55 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145941611.31773.48.camel@cutter> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910604231326y742cbfah994a6054fd785d3c@mail.gmail.com> <20060424024647.GA31508@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145848352.25417.3.camel@cutter> <20060424185546.087d42a8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1145941611.31773.48.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <20060425105255.6dcefe65.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 01:06:50 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 18:55 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 23:12:32 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > > > > Also how do we handle the issue of security in > > > terms of the package-signing key during transitions? Clearly anyone > > > outgoing shouldn't keep access to the key. > > > > "Clearly"? > > > > At present, not everybody in FESCO has access to the sign/push scripts or > > the master repository. Access was granted based on an established level of > > trust, wasn't it? If people in FESCO are replaced, do you really want to > > throw away such an establishment? Wow! That's a step backwards IMO. > > I don't understand what you mean here. I think we've got some sort of > miscommunication. > > Here's what I'm saying: > > we have N signers right now. At some point it is conceivable that one of > the signers will stop working on the project. I do not mean anything > about the people leaving FESCO - I mean about the people leaving the > group of signers. Okay. Your initial comment was in the context of "people leaving FESCO". You called it "outgoing", with no clear reference to "people leaving the project alltogether". Without membership in the extras_signers group, there is no access to the key anymore anyway. Here's the full context: > > So, there are some members who want to leave FESCO at the moment. That is > > fine. Thank them for their contributions and let them go. Then elect > > enough members to make FESCO a governing body of 13. Then in 6 months, > > those that were there already have their term up and you elect another half. > > At the risk of sounding pessmistic - do we have 7 new people who > actually want the jobs? Also how do we handle the issue of security in > terms of the package-signing key during transitions? Clearly anyone > outgoing shouldn't keep access to the key. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 25 09:34:26 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 05:34:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604250934.k3P9YQnI011256@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emacs-muse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 ------- Additional Comments From jonathan.underwood at gmail.com 2006-04-25 05:34 EST ------- Byte compiling in %post is an interesting idea, but I think it doesn't really survive a cost-benefit analysis. Getting the infrastructure right for that would be a big job. Plus, if I understand correctly, we may miss build fails and start shipping broken packages, since I suspect the build system won't detect byte compilation fails, since it builds, but doesn't install the package. One could imagine installing a new emacsen package, which would trigger byte compiling of a number of installed packages which, since the elisp api isn't stable, could break. Messy. Or do I have the wrong end of the stick? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 25 09:53:49 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 05:53:49 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604250953.k3P9rnXW016510@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emacs-muse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 ------- Additional Comments From tagoh at redhat.com 2006-04-25 05:53 EST ------- it may be a little higher cost, right. so we could just borrow emacsen-common package from Debian, which is working well. For detecting fails at the build time, don't you do any testing when you put newer package? as one sometimes wrongly put a broken package that just passed compiler-wise false detection, putting packages without testing is always dangerous. you could still find any issues more with self-installation testing before pushing packages into the build queue. Well, if the elisp api isn't stable, problems should appears with/without add-on elisp, even with/without this idea. then that flavor of emacsen itself will be broken. it's irrelevant to this idea. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Apr 25 10:22:30 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 11:22:30 +0100 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <1145960550.12771.0.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi > sodipodi There was some discussion over sodipodi a few weeks back. After reflecting on it, I decided not to import it (I have it built here) as inkscape replaced the package. Feel free though to take it on though. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 25 10:33:25 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 06:33:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604251033.k3PAXPlw028050@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emacs-muse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 ------- Additional Comments From jonathan.underwood at gmail.com 2006-04-25 06:33 EST ------- Of course I test building of the packages using mock. However, I can't test *installation* on all platforms, as I simply don't have access to them all. What you're proposing relies upon elisp compilation at install time, not package build time. Mock goes a long way to testing package building, but not package installation. The elisp api is well understood to be inconsistent between flavours, and unstable between versions within a flavour. This isn't a problem, as packages get updated as the api changes. But, your proposal would have packages automatically triggered to be byte compiled for all emacs versions as they're installed, irrespective of whether the package has been updated for the relevant api... this will inevitably lead to broken packages installed on users machines, UNLESS there is a way to control what versions of emacs the package is byte compiled for on installation/triggering. That may be possible? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From mpeters at mac.com Tue Apr 25 10:48:11 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 03:48:11 -0700 Subject: [Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse In-Reply-To: <200604250953.k3P9rnXW016510@www.beta.redhat.com> References: <200604250953.k3P9rnXW016510@www.beta.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1145962091.19354.51.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 05:53 -0400, bugzilla at redhat.com wrote: > For detecting fails at the build time, don't you do any testing when you put > newer package? as one sometimes wrongly put a broken package that just passed > compiler-wise false detection, putting packages without testing is always > dangerous. you could still find any issues more with self-installation testing > before pushing packages into the build queue. Packagers are expected to test updated before requesting build, but working on the packagers machine doesn't mean properly works with the various configurations out there, which may not be running everything up to current patch level etc. From abraxis at telkomsa.net Tue Apr 25 10:48:14 2006 From: abraxis at telkomsa.net (Neil Thompson) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 12:48:14 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 04:55:30PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > ATM, I am just asking questions to clarify things. Unfortunately, I > sense no indication of democracy. > You say that as though it's a bad thing - let a million flies vote and you'll end up with crap all over the place. I become less and less convinced every year that democracy works in the free software world - you tend to end up with people who are so focussed on maintaining their popularity that they can't make the hard decisions - either that or marketroids who start impacting on the technical side of the project. I REALLY don't want to see this project ruined by some misplaced idea of "power to the people". -- Cheers! (Relax...have a homebrew) Neil THEOREM: VI is perfect. PROOF: VI in roman numerals is 6. The natural numbers < 6 which divide 6 are 1, 2, and 3. 1+2+3 = 6. So 6 is a perfect number. Therefore, VI is perfect. QED -- Arthur Tateishi From fedora at leemhuis.info Tue Apr 25 11:12:36 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 13:12:36 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> Message-ID: <1145963556.8204.39.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Dienstag, den 25.04.2006, 12:48 +0200 schrieb Neil Thompson: > On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 04:55:30PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > ATM, I am just asking questions to clarify things. Unfortunately, I > > sense no indication of democracy. > You say that as though it's a bad thing - let a million flies vote and you'll > end up with crap all over the place. > > I become less and less convinced every year that democracy works in the free > software world - you tend to end up with people who are so focussed on maintaining > their popularity that they can't make the hard decisions - either that or marketroids > who start impacting on the technical side of the project. That's a risk I fear, too. That's one of the reasons why I'd like to see self nominations with a detailed "mission statement" and a section " things I plan to drive forward when elected for FESCo". CU thl From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 25 11:53:02 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 07:53:02 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604251153.k3PBr2mS016580@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emacs-muse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 ------- Additional Comments From tagoh at redhat.com 2006-04-25 07:52 EST ------- Well, I'm not blaming you on your packaging process. I'm sorry if you feel that way. I mean you could just package your elisp as noarch package, and there shouldn't be any different between architectures. if that's a problem, possibly it should appears at the build time for a flavor of that emacsen. so I suppose you can assume that the installation on all archs should be ok if you can install your elisp successfully on your box. or is this wrong assumption? Well, I'm not sure if I understood correctly your comment on elisp api though, for instance, if your package, foo is updated, emacsen-common is just going to byte-compile foo only, or another one if your install script invokes one - actually in Debian, apel install script invokes flim install script so that it depends on flim and sometimes broke without re-byte-compiling it, but anyway - for all flavors of emacsen since the byte-compiled elisp files for foo is out-of-date. and if only xemacs package is updated, emacsen-common is going to remove all byte-compiled files for xemacs and byte-compile all elisp packages for xemacs again. it won't touch other flavors of emacsen. so I'm not sure what's "irrespective". for good example above apel install script, here is quote: # recompile flim pkg=flim if [ -d /usr/share/${FLAVOR}/site-lisp/${pkg} ]; then if [ -f /usr/lib/emacsen-common/packages/install/${pkg} ]: then /usr/lib/emacsen-common/packages/remove/${pkg} ${FLAVOR} /usr/lib/emacsen-common/packages/install/${pkg} ${FLAVOR} fi fi Those is what described in apel install script that put as /usr/lib/emacsen-common/packages/install/apel on the debian box. and ${FLAVOR} is to know which flavors of emacsen - including versions of emacsen - such as emacs21 and xemacs21 install script is going to be invoked for. Is it clear? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 25 11:58:11 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 07:58:11 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604251158.k3PBwBa0018458@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emacs-muse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 ------- Additional Comments From tagoh at redhat.com 2006-04-25 07:57 EST ------- doh, *flim* depends on apel. well, if this is the case, only the way without harcode like this is, to rely on %trigger. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From rc040203 at freenet.de Tue Apr 25 12:07:37 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 14:07:37 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145963556.8204.39.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1145963556.8204.39.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 13:12 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 25.04.2006, 12:48 +0200 schrieb Neil Thompson: > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 04:55:30PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > ATM, I am just asking questions to clarify things. Unfortunately, I > > > sense no indication of democracy. > > You say that as though it's a bad thing - let a million flies vote and you'll > > end up with crap all over the place. > > > > I become less and less convinced every year that democracy works in the free > > software world - you tend to end up with people who are so focussed on maintaining > > their popularity that they can't make the hard decisions - either that or marketroids > > who start impacting on the technical side of the project. > > That's a risk I fear, too. There are many shades between black and white, i.e. between dictatorship, absolutistic monachy on one hand and a basis democracy, voting on every small detail every second day. The key is: representative democracy. It's what most Western countries apply. You elect your representative for a limited time, he decides on his own during his election period, etc. Another directorship model would be a two chamber model, similar to what most democracies and even many companies apply (supervisor board, board of directors). Typically one of these chambers will be seated with delegates (e.g. one 1/3 RH, 1/3 FE packagers, 1/3 FESCO), while the other chamber would be elected by the "masses". > That's one of the reasons why I'd like to see > self nominations with a detailed "mission statement" and a section " > things I plan to drive forward when elected for FESCo". My point is: I sense not a single trace of democracy at RH and I sense not a trace of supervision/monitoring/control of the community over the boards inaugurated by RH. Some examples: * RH has killed the FF, without even informing the community in advance. (Now some projects are complaining about lack of funding - Could it be RH missed the aspect of using a "foundation as means of fundraising?) * RH has proclaimed the FPB and has inaugurated the persons at their own will without consulting nor informing the community. They selecting a person as head we never saw in any Fedora Project before nor without thinking about this organs interaction with other Fedora Projects. (In politics such an incident would be called "palace revolution") ... Even an enlightened absolutistic government behaves different. Ralf From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Tue Apr 25 12:16:15 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:16:15 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1145963556.8204.39.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1145967375.31773.76.camel@cutter> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 14:07 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > Some examples: > * RH has killed the FF, without even informing the community in advance. > (Now some projects are complaining about lack of funding - Could it be > RH missed the aspect of using a "foundation as means of fundraising?) in advance of what? The Foundation was never gonna happen - so what's the advanced notice _do_? > * RH has proclaimed the FPB and has inaugurated the persons at their own > will without consulting nor informing the community. They selecting a > person as head we never saw in any Fedora Project before nor without > thinking about this organs interaction with other Fedora Projects. > (In politics such an incident would be called "palace revolution") In psychology the above would be called paranoid delusions. -sv From rc040203 at freenet.de Tue Apr 25 12:25:03 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 14:25:03 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145967375.31773.76.camel@cutter> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1145963556.8204.39.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145967375.31773.76.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1145967903.986.254.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 08:16 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 14:07 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > Some examples: > > * RH has killed the FF, without even informing the community in advance. > > (Now some projects are complaining about lack of funding - Could it be > > RH missed the aspect of using a "foundation as means of fundraising?) > > in advance of what? The Foundation was never gonna happen - so what's > the advanced notice _do_? > > > * RH has proclaimed the FPB and has inaugurated the persons at their own > > will without consulting nor informing the community. They selecting a > > person as head we never saw in any Fedora Project before nor without > > thinking about this organs interaction with other Fedora Projects. > > (In politics such an incident would be called "palace revolution") > > In psychology the above would be called paranoid delusions. Does anybody know how to impeach FPB and FESCO members? Ralf From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Tue Apr 25 12:30:33 2006 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 07:30:33 -0500 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1145963556.8204.39.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20060425123033.GA16754@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 02:07:37PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > My point is: I sense not a single trace of democracy at RH and I sense > not a trace of supervision/monitoring/control of the community over the > boards inaugurated by RH. > > Some examples: > * RH has killed the FF, without even informing the community in advance. > (Now some projects are complaining about lack of funding - Could it be > RH missed the aspect of using a "foundation as means of fundraising?) > What does that have to do with FESCO? > * RH has proclaimed the FPB and has inaugurated the persons at their own > will without consulting nor informing the community. They selecting a > person as head we never saw in any Fedora Project before nor without > thinking about this organs interaction with other Fedora Projects. > (In politics such an incident would be called "palace revolution") Again, what does that have to do with FESCO? You seem to want to escalate issues with Fedora and it's governance as a whole when all we're discussing at this point is Fedora Extras and how it should be run. Extras was around before either of those examples happened. It's also the largest community driven project within Fedora itself. I believe (and I could be mistaken here) that it is also the first official Fedora project to be chaired by someone outside of Red Hat.(1) My point is, Extras seems to move along at it's own pace and the on-goings of how Red Hat is dealing with things don't appear to have a large detrimental impact. We're talking about how we, the Extras community, want to govern ourselves. Leave Red Hat out of this discussion please. josh (1) Jesse Keating is the chair of the Legacy project and was so before being hired by Red Hat. However I believe it got official Fedora project status after Extras did. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 25 12:26:38 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:26:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604251226.k3PCQclS026521@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emacs-muse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 ------- Additional Comments From tagoh at redhat.com 2006-04-25 08:26 EST ------- Also emacsen-common is going to re-byte-compile apel if flim is updated or installed, in above case, though. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Tue Apr 25 12:39:03 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:39:03 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145967903.986.254.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1145963556.8204.39.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145967375.31773.76.camel@cutter> <1145967903.986.254.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1145968744.31773.79.camel@cutter> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 14:25 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > * RH has proclaimed the FPB and has inaugurated the persons at their own > > > will without consulting nor informing the community. They selecting a > > > person as head we never saw in any Fedora Project before nor without > > > thinking about this organs interaction with other Fedora Projects. > > > (In politics such an incident would be called "palace revolution") > > > > In psychology the above would be called paranoid delusions. > > Does anybody know how to impeach FPB and FESCO members? > Actually, I need to send an email to the Fedora Advisory Board list about the addition/removal of members. :-D -sv From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Tue Apr 25 12:36:20 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 14:36:20 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 25 Apr 2006 14:25:03 +0200." <1145967903.986.254.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <200604251236.k3PCaKfS024976@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> rc040203 at freenet.de said: > Does anybody know how to impeach FPB and FESCO members? Sure. Convince the other members that the one(s) you want to impeach deserves it, or bring up enough contributors' outcry. You make it all sound so dramatic. It's not like FESCo members had money to put into projects and could decide to cut down yours, AFAIK... Christian From rc040203 at freenet.de Tue Apr 25 12:46:59 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 14:46:59 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <20060425123033.GA16754@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1145963556.8204.39.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425123033.GA16754@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <1145969219.986.269.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 07:30 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 02:07:37PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > My point is: I sense not a single trace of democracy at RH and I sense > > not a trace of supervision/monitoring/control of the community over the > > boards inaugurated by RH. > > > > Some examples: > > * RH has killed the FF, without even informing the community in advance. > > (Now some projects are complaining about lack of funding - Could it be > > RH missed the aspect of using a "foundation as means of fundraising?) > > > > What does that have to do with FESCO? We are discussing FESCO and relationship to the community and to the FPB, and how democracy can be introduced. > > * RH has proclaimed the FPB and has inaugurated the persons at their own > > will without consulting nor informing the community. They selecting a > > person as head we never saw in any Fedora Project before nor without > > thinking about this organs interaction with other Fedora Projects. > > (In politics such an incident would be called "palace revolution") > > Again, what does that have to do with FESCO? FPB controls FESCO. > You seem to want to escalate issues with Fedora That's absolutely not my intention, but you are right, I consider current Fedora leadership model as to be close to the worst of all possible models. > Extras was around before either of those examples happened. It's also the > largest community driven project within Fedora itself. I believe (and I > could be mistaken here) that it is also the first official Fedora project > to be chaired by someone outside of Red Hat.(1) My point is, Extras seems > to move along at it's own pace and the on-goings of how Red Hat is dealing > with things don't appear to have a large detrimental impact. > > We're talking about how we, the Extras community, want to govern ourselves. > Leave Red Hat out of this discussion please. That's one possible attitude ... But ask yourself: Given RH's attitude, is FESCO of any importance? As I sense it: No, it isn't. This discussion a waste of time. The RH or current FESCO Gods will decide on their will. The best we can expect is of them giving us an ear :( Ralf From jspaleta at gmail.com Tue Apr 25 12:53:10 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:53:10 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145969219.986.269.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1145963556.8204.39.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425123033.GA16754@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145969219.986.269.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <604aa7910604250553p29ccc730gb847574b4e912a7b@mail.gmail.com> On 4/25/06, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > As I sense it: No, it isn't. This discussion a waste of time. So to be clear... you are participating in a discussion that you feel is ultimately a waste of your time. Good to know. -jef From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Tue Apr 25 12:57:16 2006 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 07:57:16 -0500 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145967903.986.254.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1145963556.8204.39.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145967375.31773.76.camel@cutter> <1145967903.986.254.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20060425125716.GB16754@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 02:25:03PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > Does anybody know how to impeach FPB and FESCO members? FPB, I have no idea and it has no relevance in _this_ discussion. For FESCO, membership is largely merit based. Does member X have some value add to FESCO still? If not, then the other members of FESCO will probably ask X to vacate their seat. I suppose members of the community could call into question X's value. However that is often hard to determine unless one follows FESCO and it's doings very closely. josh From bdpepple at ameritech.net Tue Apr 25 12:22:43 2006 From: bdpepple at ameritech.net (Brian Pepple) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:22:43 -0400 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <1145967763.3806.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 19:30 +1200, Michael J Knox wrote: > I am willing to take ownership of the following orphaned packages: > sodipodi > Should sodipodi be included in Extras again considering it's not being actively developed? Seems sorta pointless since it's successor Inkscape is already included in FE. /B -- Brian Pepple gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Tue Apr 25 13:17:50 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 09:17:50 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145969219.986.269.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1145963556.8204.39.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425123033.GA16754@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145969219.986.269.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1145971070.31773.87.camel@cutter> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 14:46 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > FPB controls FESCO. Yes, and we shall rule with an iron fist!!!! Maybe you should meet the people involved before you worry. None of us are mega-maniacal madmen or madwomen. We all really think there are places to improve fedora and we're interested in working on them. > But ask yourself: Given RH's attitude, is FESCO of any importance? > importance is relative. FESCO is very important relative to a lot of things in fedora. Is FESCO more important than the resources rh already throws at fedora? The buildsystems, the bandwidth, the people? no. Is there any conflict between these two items that would make us need to weigh their value versus importance? No. > As I sense it: No, it isn't. This discussion a waste of time. The RH or > current FESCO Gods will decide on their will. The best we can expect is > of them giving us an ear :( If you continue using dramatic hyperbole to describe everything I can assure that few people will ever hear you, Ralf. -sv From pertusus at free.fr Tue Apr 25 13:22:25 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:22:25 +0200 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <1145967763.3806.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> <1145967763.3806.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> Message-ID: <20060425132225.GA2701@free.fr> > Should sodipodi be included in Extras again considering it's not being > actively developed? Seems sorta pointless since it's successor Inkscape > is already included in FE. Not actively developed packages are accepted in extras. Even packages without clear upstream or no upstream (this happens a lot for old packages that are fortunately often also very stable). Of course it is harder to attract maintainers when the package isn't actively developed and there is a successor, but my understanding is that it is not an issue. Having old packages that depend on old lib version shouldn't be a reason not to update the libs, however. So if there is trouble with the dependencies, then the maintainer will certainly have to package some compat packages so it may even become so annoying that the package is dropped, but it is not a requirements. -- Pat From mpeters at mac.com Tue Apr 25 13:36:09 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 06:36:09 -0700 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1145963556.8204.39.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1145972169.6969.11.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 14:07 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > Some examples: > * RH has killed the FF, without even informing the community in advance. Tax law would have been a big issue because as a non profit it would have had to have a certain amount of money from the community it serves - or something like that. That's the kind of thing that _can't_ be done by vote, because not everyone is familiar enough with US Tax law to understand the possible risk, let alone knowledgeable enough to determine whether it really could fly or not. Unless I misunderstood what happened (a possibility). From bdpepple at ameritech.net Tue Apr 25 13:47:10 2006 From: bdpepple at ameritech.net (Brian Pepple) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 09:47:10 -0400 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <20060425132225.GA2701@free.fr> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> <1145967763.3806.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> <20060425132225.GA2701@free.fr> Message-ID: <1145972830.6797.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 15:22 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > Should sodipodi be included in Extras again considering it's not being > > actively developed? Seems sorta pointless since it's successor Inkscape > > is already included in FE. > > Not actively developed packages are accepted in extras. Even packages > without clear upstream or no upstream (this happens a lot for old packages > that are fortunately often also very stable). I'm well aware that non-active packages are accepted in FE, but does it make sense to spend time on packaging this, when there is a clear successor to sodipodi that is actively be developed? /B -- Brian Pepple gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From jspaleta at gmail.com Tue Apr 25 14:24:27 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:24:27 -0400 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <1145972830.6797.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> <1145967763.3806.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> <20060425132225.GA2701@free.fr> <1145972830.6797.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910604250724j1fe41e70lfd387cb423fba0eb@mail.gmail.com> On 4/25/06, Brian Pepple wrote: > I'm well aware that non-active packages are accepted in FE, but does it > make sense to spend time on packaging this, when there is a clear > successor to sodipodi that is actively be developed? I use inkscape pretty much daily at this point to do minor svg manipulation. From a user perspective, I honestly doubt I'd ever need to install sodipodi. There isn't a big toolkit/library difference between the codebases so there's no secondary codebase purity reason associated with the packages either. Sometimes we have to let codebases pass away into the long goodbye and move on. -jef"just as long as oneko never dies"spaleta From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Apr 25 15:18:03 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 11:18:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604251518.k3PFI3WA019806@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emacs-muse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2006-04-25 11:17 EST ------- Removing fedora-extras-list, because we should have got the attention of people who care about emacs sub-packages by now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Apr 25 16:03:39 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:03:39 +0100 Subject: i386 binaries in the x86_64 directories Message-ID: <1145981019.15643.10.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, There is currently a horrid problem with the way mono is packaging which is annoying the heck out of me and it only hits 64 bit architecture (as far as I can tell). The problem is this. When you compile mono from source, if you say --libdir=/usr/lib64, everything goes into /usr/lib64 happily and the .pc files go into /usr/lib64/pkgconfig. However, when compiling via a spec file, even if you define libdir as /usr/lib, bits move to /usr/lib64/pkgconfig and it doesn't matter what is passed in the % configure line. Upshot, anything built against the mono rpms (as an rpm) fails. I've copied chunks from fspot and that isn't cutting the ice either (which is a pain!). What I am thinking until this problem can get sorted fully (and it is being worked on), is to build for x86 and then do like OpenOffice and a few other packages, have the x86 binaries in the x86_64 directories. Is this possible under the extras system and if it is, what do I need to do to allow this to happen? TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From paul at city-fan.org Tue Apr 25 16:10:19 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:10:19 +0100 Subject: i386 binaries in the x86_64 directories In-Reply-To: <1145981019.15643.10.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1145981019.15643.10.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <444E49EB.7040003@city-fan.org> PFJ wrote: > Hi, > > There is currently a horrid problem with the way mono is packaging which > is annoying the heck out of me and it only hits 64 bit architecture (as > far as I can tell). > > The problem is this. When you compile mono from source, if you say > --libdir=/usr/lib64, everything goes into /usr/lib64 happily and the .pc > files go into /usr/lib64/pkgconfig. However, when compiling via a spec > file, even if you define libdir as /usr/lib, bits move > to /usr/lib64/pkgconfig and it doesn't matter what is passed in the % > configure line. What are the Makefile lines responsible for installing the misplaced files? Perhaps there's a make macro you can set to put them in the right place? Paul. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 25 16:46:22 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 18:46:22 +0200 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <20060425132225.GA2701@free.fr> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> <1145967763.3806.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> <20060425132225.GA2701@free.fr> Message-ID: <20060425184622.8389a2f9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:22:25 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > Should sodipodi be included in Extras again considering it's not being > > actively developed? Seems sorta pointless since it's successor Inkscape > > is already included in FE. > > Not actively developed packages are accepted in extras. Even packages > without clear upstream or no upstream (this happens a lot for old packages > that are fortunately often also very stable). So, is this true for Sodipodi? That's the question. > Of course it is harder to attract maintainers when the package isn't > actively developed and there is a successor, but my understanding is that > it is not an issue. Having old packages that depend on old lib version > shouldn't be a reason not to update the libs, however. So if there is > trouble with the dependencies, then the maintainer will certainly have to > package some compat packages so it may even become so annoying that the > package is dropped, but it is not a requirements. Some projects are abandoned because the developers haved reached a point where they believe they are done. And they seem to work satisfactory for several months or even years. However, there's always the risk that an unmaintained piece of software will need maintenance in a form which requires upstream development, particularly when it is a GUI application. It could be anything ranging from non-trivial C/C++ standards compliance updates, ordinary bugs, to updates required by changes in APIs. Think twice before you encourage our users to start using a program where this might happen. From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Tue Apr 25 17:13:22 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 19:13:22 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060425171322.GF9533@neu.nirvana> On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 08:53:09PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > - How many members should FESCo have? > > FESCO currently has 17 members. The general consensus is that the number > of members should remain odd. Thrown into the ring during the last > IRC-Meeting were 9, 11, 13, 15 or 17 members. > Reasons for a smaller group: More people make it harder to make > decisions. > Reasons for a big group: More people can make more things happen and the > load per member is a bit lower. given the thread's development as an example, I think less people with faster communication and decision making time is better, otherwise you may end up like Debian where important decisions are stalled by endless threads ("less" as an absolute measure, I'm not comparing to any specific number like 17 or 9). If there is fear of too high workload per person then some work activities of fesco should be checked whether they belong elsewhere. If fesco feels on some specific issue at hand that it is too small in numbers to make a decision it can always escalate to the next larger entity to get more opinions like it is happening now. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mspevack at redhat.com Tue Apr 25 17:28:13 2006 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 13:28:13 -0400 (EDT) Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <20060425123033.GA16754@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1145963556.8204.39.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425123033.GA16754@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: On Tue, 25 Apr 2006, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 02:07:37PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >> My point is: I sense not a single trace of democracy at RH and I sense >> not a trace of supervision/monitoring/control of the community over the >> boards inaugurated by RH. I need to chime in here a little bit. I don't quite understand what the second part of your sentance means, but as to the first point -- seriously? You see *not a single trace* of democracy in the way Red Hat handles Fedora? How can you say that when Fedora Extras itself is a major piece of that democracy? Thorsten is your chair -- he's not a Red Hat employee. How can you say that when Red Hat is adopting *internally* the packaging guidelines that came out of the Fedora Extras work? You feel like Extras doesn't have influence? You feel like FESCO (which drives Extras) doesn't make an impact or influence the way things are done? >> Some examples: >> * RH has killed the FF, without even informing the community in advance. >> (Now some projects are complaining about lack of funding - Could it be >> RH missed the aspect of using a "foundation as means of fundraising?) Due respect Josh, but just because we didn't inform *you* ahead of time doesn't mean that the decision was made entirely within Red Hat's walls. A number of non-Red Hat folks knew about the decision ahead of time, and had a hand in helping us to come up with the reasoning and messaging around why FF didn't make sense, and why the current Board model is a superior choice. Did you read the message that we sent out discussing the reasons why the Foundation decision wasn't compelling? Fundraising was specifically addressed in there. Furthermore, there was a very frank conversation about the way Fedora *is* governed, and the main point out of that is that the Fedora Project Board is set up *purposely* to have a very strong representation of people who don't work at Red Hat. This is the *reality* of what we are doing right now. The Fedora Project Board is empowered to make decisions about what Fedora does. A significant amount of that Board's membership is not @redhat.com -- and I promise you that I have no problem with seeing that balance shift more toward the community over time, if that is what is clearly the best for Fedora. > What does that have to do with FESCO? > >> * RH has proclaimed the FPB and has inaugurated the persons at their own >> will without consulting nor informing the community. They selecting a >> person as head we never saw in any Fedora Project before nor without >> thinking about this organs interaction with other Fedora Projects. >> (In politics such an incident would be called "palace revolution") As I said above, parts of the community were consulted. The community is consulted now in everything the Board does. The actions of the board are transparent, and everyone has a direct line to contact and influence the work that the Board is doing. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board In response to your criticism of me as being the Chair of the FPB without having been active in Fedora previously: It's true that I wasn't directly involved in the Fedora side of Red Hat prior to beginning in my current job, but don't base your opinion of me solely on that. If you have concerns and issues with the way I'm handling Fedora, write the Board and complain. Write to boss and convince him that I should be replaced. Make a compelling argument for why things are wrong and how they should be instead and your voice will be heard. My job isn't to be a dictator over Fedora. My job is to be Fedora's biggest advocate within Red Hat, to set Fedora up as much as possible for community decision making and empowerment, and to constantly remind the rest of Red Hat of the immense value of open source methods, community involvement, etc. I get a paycheck from Red Hat. But I work for Fedora. If the larger powers that be inside of Red Hat decide that Fedora isn't important, then I'll be the one yelling the loudest, and most publicly that they are wrong, and I'll be first in line to submit my resignation. But you know what? That isn't going to happen. The very fact that the position (that I currently have) was formalized within Red Hat underscores Red Hat's desire to see Fedora be a success. > We're talking about how we, the Extras community, want to govern > ourselves. Leave Red Hat out of this discussion please. I'm not really sure what you're complaining about. Someone asked the Board: "Extras is ready to shuffle up its leadership a bit. Do you guys need/want to have a say in that?" Look at the first response: it was me say "Nope, you guys do your own thing. And the Board is going to learn from you." https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2006-April/msg00185.html So tell me: where's the lack of democracy? Where's the iron fist? What are you *actually* angry about? Respectfully, Max -- Max Spevack + gpg key -- http://people.redhat.com/~mspevack/mspevack.asc + fingerprint -- CD52 5E72 369B B00D 9E9A 773E 2FDB CB46 5A17 CF21 From mspevack at redhat.com Tue Apr 25 17:32:57 2006 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 13:32:57 -0400 (EDT) Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1145963556.8204.39.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425123033.GA16754@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: On Tue, 25 Apr 2006, Max Spevack wrote: >>> Some examples: >>> * RH has killed the FF, without even informing the community in advance. >>> (Now some projects are complaining about lack of funding - Could it be >>> RH missed the aspect of using a "foundation as means of fundraising?) > > Due respect Josh, but just because we didn't inform *you* ahead of time > doesn't mean that the decision was made entirely within Red Hat's walls. A > number of non-Red Hat folks knew about the decision ahead of time, and had a > hand in helping us to come up with the reasoning and messaging around why FF > didn't make sense, and why the current Board model is a superior choice. Oops, got a bit confused with the threading. I guess Ralf was really the original writer. Sorry Josh. --Max > Did you read the message that we sent out discussing the reasons why the > Foundation decision wasn't compelling? Fundraising was specifically > addressed in there. > > Furthermore, there was a very frank conversation about the way Fedora *is* > governed, and the main point out of that is that the Fedora Project Board is > set up *purposely* to have a very strong representation of people who don't > work at Red Hat. This is the *reality* of what we are doing right now. The > Fedora Project Board is empowered to make decisions about what Fedora does. > A significant amount of that Board's membership is not @redhat.com -- and I > promise you that I have no problem with seeing that balance shift more toward > the community over time, if that is what is clearly the best for Fedora. > >> What does that have to do with FESCO? >> >>> * RH has proclaimed the FPB and has inaugurated the persons at their own >>> will without consulting nor informing the community. They selecting a >>> person as head we never saw in any Fedora Project before nor without >>> thinking about this organs interaction with other Fedora Projects. >>> (In politics such an incident would be called "palace revolution") > > As I said above, parts of the community were consulted. The community is > consulted now in everything the Board does. The actions of the board are > transparent, and everyone has a direct line to contact and influence the work > that the Board is doing. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board > > In response to your criticism of me as being the Chair of the FPB without > having been active in Fedora previously: It's true that I wasn't directly > involved in the Fedora side of Red Hat prior to beginning in my current job, > but don't base your opinion of me solely on that. If you have concerns and > issues with the way I'm handling Fedora, write the Board and complain. Write > to boss and convince him that I should be replaced. Make a compelling > argument for why things are wrong and how they should be instead and your > voice will be heard. > > My job isn't to be a dictator over Fedora. My job is to be Fedora's biggest > advocate within Red Hat, to set Fedora up as much as possible for community > decision making and empowerment, and to constantly remind the rest of Red Hat > of the immense value of open source methods, community involvement, etc. > > I get a paycheck from Red Hat. But I work for Fedora. If the larger powers > that be inside of Red Hat decide that Fedora isn't important, then I'll be > the one yelling the loudest, and most publicly that they are wrong, and I'll > be first in line to submit my resignation. > > But you know what? That isn't going to happen. The very fact that the > position (that I currently have) was formalized within Red Hat underscores > Red Hat's desire to see Fedora be a success. > >> We're talking about how we, the Extras community, want to govern ourselves. >> Leave Red Hat out of this discussion please. > > I'm not really sure what you're complaining about. Someone asked the Board: > "Extras is ready to shuffle up its leadership a bit. Do you guys need/want > to have a say in that?" > > Look at the first response: it was me say "Nope, you guys do your own thing. > And the Board is going to learn from you." > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2006-April/msg00185.html > > So tell me: where's the lack of democracy? Where's the iron fist? What are > you *actually* angry about? > > Respectfully, > Max > > -- Max Spevack + gpg key -- http://people.redhat.com/~mspevack/mspevack.asc + fingerprint -- CD52 5E72 369B B00D 9E9A 773E 2FDB CB46 5A17 CF21 From mpeters at mac.com Tue Apr 25 17:34:14 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:34:14 -0700 Subject: compat packages Message-ID: <1145986454.6969.34.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> I've got some questions about compatibility packages, and whether they are in the scope of Fedora Extras when nothing in Extras needs them. Obviously if a compat package is needed to build/run something in extras, it belongs in Extras for repo-closure (unless it is in core). The gstreamer08 packages are an example. A bugzilla I have open now is for the fc4 (gnome 2.10) version of gtkhtml3. When I opened it, an upstream package I maintained did not work with gnome 2.12 or newer. Then it worked, but was quite buggy. Finally (after testing on my own machine for a few days, it just went through the build system for fc5) upstream has a new version that as far as I can tell, works just as well as the older version that was coded for gnome 2.10. But I'm still willing to maintain the 3.6.x version of gtkhtml3 simply because I think Fedora needs to be more backwards compatible when it comes to shared libraries, especially since the official line now is to discourage static linking to the point where static libraries are not wanted in our packages. Every update of gnome - someone on some list or forum has problems because libgtkhtml changed its shared library, and I think that when possible (no file conflicts and someone is willing to maintain them), compat versions should be readily available. But do they belong in Extras if nothing in extras uses them, or should I maybe subscribe to yet another list (Fedora Legacy) and see if maybe some other people there want to make a "legacy library" repo for current versions of Fedora? Backwards compatibility is important to me, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. When things are built against shared libraries which is the better way to do it, backwards compatibility can only be obtained if the older shared libraries are easily available from *somewhere*. But if the consensus is that they shouldn't be in Extras unless needed by an Extras package, I'm willing to campaign for a repo elsewhere. I'd just like to know how people here feel about it. From fedora at leemhuis.info Tue Apr 25 17:40:18 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 19:40:18 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <20060425171322.GF9533@neu.nirvana> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060425171322.GF9533@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1145986818.2325.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Dienstag, den 25.04.2006, 19:13 +0200 schrieb Axel Thimm: > On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 08:53:09PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > - How many members should FESCo have? > > > > FESCO currently has 17 members. The general consensus is that the number > > of members should remain odd. Thrown into the ring during the last > > IRC-Meeting were 9, 11, 13, 15 or 17 members. > > Reasons for a smaller group: More people make it harder to make > > decisions. > > Reasons for a big group: More people can make more things happen and the > > load per member is a bit lower. > > given the thread's development as an example, I think less people with > faster communication and decision making time is better, otherwise you > may end up like Debian where important decisions are stalled by > endless threads ("less" as an absolute measure, I'm not comparing to > any specific number like 17 or 9). Well, you might have a point here. But we are 17 people in the current FESCo and the problem seldom was that we couldn't find a agreement -- the problem was that much work wasn't done as good as I'd have liked (or wasn't done at all). I'm still for 13 members for the next FESCo and can live with 15 also. But I don't want less -- if it doesn't work we can agree on a smaller FESCo when the next election happens. > If there is fear of too high workload per person then some work > activities of fesco should be checked whether they belong > elsewhere. True, but that didn't worked well in the past. I hope we can improve that with the next FESCo. > If fesco feels on some specific issue at hand that it is too small in > numbers to make a decision it can always escalate to the next larger > entity to get more opinions like it is happening now. I would prefer if nearly all discussion would be on public places. Yes, that leads to sometimes endlessly discussion like this (we still have no system how to actually do the FESCo vote -- does really nobody here have experiences how to actually do something like that?). But openness IMHO is more important. CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Tue Apr 25 18:01:34 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 20:01:34 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145986818.2325.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060425171322.GF9533@neu.nirvana> <1145986818.2325.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060425180134.GI9533@neu.nirvana> On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 07:40:18PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 25.04.2006, 19:13 +0200 schrieb Axel Thimm: > > If fesco feels on some specific issue at hand that it is too small in > > numbers to make a decision it can always escalate to the next larger > > entity to get more opinions like it is happening now. > > I would prefer if nearly all discussion would be on public > places. Yes, that leads to sometimes endlessly discussion like this > [...]. But openness IMHO is more important. I wasn't suggesting on going behind doors, I completely agree on transparency and openness towards the outside of fesco. A model that may keep fesco workload low could be the following: o the community/fesco has some suggestions, these are evaluated by fesco and discussed with the community with a given time cut-off, where fesco has to come to a conclusion. All this happens in public, but if the discussion doesn't reach a consensus you have the time cut-off, where fesco members simply vote on the issue. o When a decision is made to attack something then fesco can decide to create a task force to actually perform the work, e.g. outsource the workload, and move on. o More often than not these task forces will be people from fesco or at least headed by them who should gather forces from the community, e.g. by calling for volunteers on a list this this one. Does that make any sense? It keeps fesco workload down and tries to involve the community as much as possible. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ville.skytta at iki.fi Tue Apr 25 18:32:45 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 21:32:45 +0300 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <1145989965.2849.47.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 19:30 +1200, Michael J Knox wrote: > I am willing to take ownership of the following orphaned packages: > > doctorj Just so you know what you're up against: IIRC this package has quite a few issues with recent C++ compilers. Meanwhile, upstream has switched to Java in 5.0.0, and I tried to build it with the GNU Java stack a long time ago, but that effort failed for some reason that I no longer remember. IMO the most productive approach would be to try upgrading to 5.0.0 again, but that practically means a complete specfile rewrite so it might not be a bad idea to submit the result for review as if it were a new package. I don't think doing so is mandatory though. From paul at city-fan.org Tue Apr 25 18:37:07 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 19:37:07 +0100 Subject: compat packages In-Reply-To: <1145986454.6969.34.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> References: <1145986454.6969.34.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> Message-ID: <1145990228.14151.3.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 10:34 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote: > I've got some questions about compatibility packages, and whether they > are in the scope of Fedora Extras when nothing in Extras needs them. > > Obviously if a compat package is needed to build/run something in > extras, it belongs in Extras for repo-closure (unless it is in core). > > The gstreamer08 packages are an example. > > A bugzilla I have open now is for the fc4 (gnome 2.10) version of > gtkhtml3. When I opened it, an upstream package I maintained did not > work with gnome 2.12 or newer. Then it worked, but was quite buggy. > > Finally (after testing on my own machine for a few days, it just went > through the build system for fc5) upstream has a new version that as far > as I can tell, works just as well as the older version that was coded > for gnome 2.10. > > But I'm still willing to maintain the 3.6.x version of gtkhtml3 simply > because I think Fedora needs to be more backwards compatible when it > comes to shared libraries, especially since the official line now is to > discourage static linking to the point where static libraries are not > wanted in our packages. > > Every update of gnome - someone on some list or forum has problems > because libgtkhtml changed its shared library, and I think that when > possible (no file conflicts and someone is willing to maintain them), > compat versions should be readily available. > > But do they belong in Extras if nothing in extras uses them, or should I > maybe subscribe to yet another list (Fedora Legacy) and see if maybe > some other people there want to make a "legacy library" repo for current > versions of Fedora? > > Backwards compatibility is important to me, and I'm sure I'm not the > only one. When things are built against shared libraries which is the > better way to do it, backwards compatibility can only be obtained if the > older shared libraries are easily available from *somewhere*. But if the > consensus is that they shouldn't be in Extras unless needed by an Extras > package, I'm willing to campaign for a repo elsewhere. I'd just like to > know how people here feel about it. I think Extras is exactly the right place for them actually. They're not "Core" but many people would find them useful to have available. I still get lots of hits on the libcurl7112 package (for libcurl.so.2) in my personal repo, which might be a useful addition to Extras. Not sure about having devel subpackages of compat libraries though. Paul. From pertusus at free.fr Tue Apr 25 18:41:28 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 20:41:28 +0200 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <20060425184622.8389a2f9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> <1145967763.3806.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> <20060425132225.GA2701@free.fr> <20060425184622.8389a2f9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060425184128.GB2701@free.fr> > > Not actively developed packages are accepted in extras. Even packages > > without clear upstream or no upstream (this happens a lot for old packages > > that are fortunately often also very stable). > > So, is this true for Sodipodi? That's the question. I was not thinking about sodipodi, I don't know that package at all. I was thinking about 3 packages I maintain libsx, asa and intuitively. But I agree these are rather simple packages (libsx is X based, but based on Xaw...). > Some projects are abandoned because the developers haved reached a point > where they believe they are done. And they seem to work satisfactory for > several months or even years. However, there's always the risk that an > unmaintained piece of software will need maintenance in a form which > requires upstream development, particularly when it is a GUI application. > It could be anything ranging from non-trivial C/C++ standards compliance > updates, ordinary bugs, to updates required by changes in APIs. Think twice > before you encourage our users to start using a program where this might > happen. I encourage nobody. Everybody is free to maintain or use a piece of software. I am just saying that it is not forbidden, it is up to the packager. -- Pat From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 25 18:45:18 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 06:45:18 +1200 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <1145967763.3806.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> <1145967763.3806.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> Message-ID: <444E6E3E.7080402@knox.net.nz> Brian Pepple wrote: > On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 19:30 +1200, Michael J Knox wrote: >> I am willing to take ownership of the following orphaned packages: >> sodipodi >> > > Should sodipodi be included in Extras again considering it's not being > actively developed? Seems sorta pointless since it's successor Inkscape > is already included in FE. > > Do you _know_ that the developer is not actively developing it? Michael From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 25 18:46:56 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 06:46:56 +1200 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <1145972830.6797.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> <1145967763.3806.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> <20060425132225.GA2701@free.fr> <1145972830.6797.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> Message-ID: <444E6EA0.2060903@knox.net.nz> Brian Pepple wrote: > On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 15:22 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: >>> Should sodipodi be included in Extras again considering it's not being >>> actively developed? Seems sorta pointless since it's successor Inkscape >>> is already included in FE. >> Not actively developed packages are accepted in extras. Even packages >> without clear upstream or no upstream (this happens a lot for old packages >> that are fortunately often also very stable). > > I'm well aware that non-active packages are accepted in FE, but does it > make sense to spend time on packaging this, when there is a clear > successor to sodipodi that is actively be developed? > Well, its my time I am spending, not your's ;) Michael From mpeters at mac.com Tue Apr 25 18:50:04 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 11:50:04 -0700 Subject: compat packages In-Reply-To: <1145990228.14151.3.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> References: <1145986454.6969.34.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> <1145990228.14151.3.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> Message-ID: <1145991004.6969.40.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 19:37 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > > I think Extras is exactly the right place for them actually. They're not > "Core" but many people would find them useful to have available. I still > get lots of hits on the libcurl7112 package (for libcurl.so.2) in my > personal repo, which might be a useful addition to Extras. > > Not sure about having devel subpackages of compat libraries though. If it uses pkgconfig - there shouldn't be any problem of header file confusion between different versions. In some cases (libshout 1 vs 2) there is conflict in the devel packages that would have to be carefully worked around, but with packages that use pkgconfig - that shouldn't really be an issue. Software that needs a compat version of one library might build just fine against newer versions of other libraries - in which case, having the devel package is useful because it would minimize the number of compat shared libraries a package needs - if it was built on fc5 using the devel package of the compat library that it does need the older version of. From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 25 19:35:14 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 07:35:14 +1200 Subject: package EOL Message-ID: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> So, my offering to unorphane Sodipodi seems to have raised a couple of good questions. When should a package be removed and considered no longer maintainable? How long without a release till considered inactive? What lengths should someone go to, to confirm a project status? Why Orphane a package that is considered EOL? I know FE as it stands does not have a policy on this, perhaps its worth knocking out some overall guidelines for the wiki? Thoughts? Michael From jonathan.underwood at gmail.com Tue Apr 25 19:59:07 2006 From: jonathan.underwood at gmail.com (Jonathan Underwood) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 20:59:07 +0100 Subject: Namespace for (X)Emacs packages? Message-ID: <645d17210604251259lc969cc3i7be2620e098740b0@mail.gmail.com> Hi, An issues has arisenduring review of the Muse package for (X)Emacs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 The FE packaging guidelines state: "If a new package is considered an "addon" package that enhances or adds a new functionality to an existing Fedora Core or Fedora Extras package without being useful on its own, its name should reflect this fact." However, it's frequently the case that an elisp package builds for both Emacs and Xemacs (and potentially any other flavours and unstable versions) making it ambiguous what the package name should be. (emacs-foo, xemacs-foo ??). To make matters worse, packages imported to FE from Core have used various schemes, often appending (x)emacs, rather than pre-pending. One suggestion is, for a tarball foo.tar.gz, to call the package foo (i.e. foo.spec, foo-version.src.rpm) but have it build these binary packages: foo-version.rpm: containing files common to all emacs (eg. docs), and required by the packages below emacs-foo-version.rpm: specific byte compiled package for Emacs emacs-foo-el-version.rpm: elisp elisp source files for Emacs xemacs-foo-version.rpm: specific byte compiled package for XEmacs xemacs-foo-el-version.rpm: source elisp files installed for XEmacs This has the disadvantage that the module name is then foo in bugzilla, and not emacs-foo or xemacs-foo, which may confuse users. Other proposals include calling the package emacs-foo, but that then might confuse xemacs users, or may result in having emacs-foo-xemacs, which sleems slightly absurd. Thoughts? (Perhaps worth reading the bugzilla before sharing them, tho). Jonathan From bdpepple at ameritech.net Tue Apr 25 19:56:47 2006 From: bdpepple at ameritech.net (Brian Pepple) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:56:47 -0400 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <444E6E3E.7080402@knox.net.nz> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> <1145967763.3806.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> <444E6E3E.7080402@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <1145995007.27459.6.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 06:45 +1200, Michael J Knox wrote: > Brian Pepple wrote: > > On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 19:30 +1200, Michael J Knox wrote: > >> I am willing to take ownership of the following orphaned packages: > >> sodipodi > >> > > > > Should sodipodi be included in Extras again considering it's not being > > actively developed? Seems sorta pointless since it's successor Inkscape > > is already included in FE. > > > > > > Do you _know_ that the developer is not actively developing it? > Well, the projects last release was in February of 2004, and all bug reports for the last year or so have been unanswered by Lauris. Also, CVS appears not to have been touched for ages. Here's Lauris last message on the mailing list from back in March 2005: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=6795136&forum_id=3970 In my book, I would consider it not being actively developed. /B -- Brian Pepple gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From rdieter at math.unl.edu Tue Apr 25 20:45:20 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:45:20 -0500 Subject: Namespace for (X)Emacs packages? In-Reply-To: <645d17210604251259lc969cc3i7be2620e098740b0@mail.gmail.com> References: <645d17210604251259lc969cc3i7be2620e098740b0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Jonathan Underwood wrote: > One suggestion is, for a tarball foo.tar.gz, to call the package foo > (i.e. foo.spec, foo-version.src.rpm) but have it build these binary > packages: > > foo-version.rpm: containing files common to all emacs (eg. docs), and > required by the packages below > emacs-foo-version.rpm: specific byte compiled package for Emacs > emacs-foo-el-version.rpm: elisp elisp source files for Emacs > xemacs-foo-version.rpm: specific byte compiled package for XEmacs > xemacs-foo-el-version.rpm: source elisp files installed for XEmacs +1 > This has the disadvantage that the module name is then foo in > bugzilla, and not emacs-foo or xemacs-foo, which may confuse users. No biggie. That's life. -- Rex From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 25 21:03:00 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:03:00 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060425210300.75820152151@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 10 R-2.3.0-1.fc3 R-2.3.0-2.fc3 ebtables-2.0.8-0.1.rc2.fc3 gourmet-0.8.5.14-2.fc3 perl-Class-DBI-Loader-Relationship-1.3-2.fc3 perl-Class-DBI-Pager-0.08-1.fc3 perl-Class-DBI-Plugin-RetrieveAll-1.04-1.fc3 perl-ExtUtils-XSBuilder-0.28-1.fc3 perl-Lingua-EN-Inflect-Number-1.1-4.fc3 perl-UNIVERSAL-exports-0.03-4.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 25 21:03:38 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:03:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060425210338.41133152151@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 20 R-2.3.0-2.fc4 amavisd-new-2.4.0-1.fc4 d4x-2.5.7.1-1.fc4 ebtables-2.0.8-0.1.rc2.fc4 echoping-5.2.0-1.fc4 gourmet-0.8.5.14-2.fc4 libsndfile-1.0.15-1.fc4 perl-Class-DBI-Loader-Relationship-1.3-2.fc4 perl-Class-DBI-Pager-0.08-1.fc4 perl-Class-DBI-Plugin-RetrieveAll-1.04-1.fc4 perl-ExtUtils-XSBuilder-0.28-1.fc4 perl-Gtk2-Spell-1.03-4.fc4 perl-Lingua-EN-Inflect-Number-1.1-4.fc4 perl-Log-Dispatch-FileRotate-1.14-1.fc4 perl-Log-Log4perl-1.04-2.fc4 perl-Module-Locate-1.7-1.fc4 perl-UNIVERSAL-exports-0.03-4.fc4 smb4k-0.7.0-1.fc4 tclhttpd-3.5.1-9.fc4 wxPython-2.6.3.2-1.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 25 21:04:24 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:04:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060425210424.DF8B4152151@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 31 R-2.3.0-1.fc5 R-2.3.0-2.fc5 amavisd-new-2.4.0-1.fc5 aspell-he-0.9-2.fc5 azureus-2.4.0.3-0.20060328cvs_5.fc5 comical-0.8-1.fc5 d4x-2.5.7.1-1.fc5 dia-0.95-1.fc5 ebtables-2.0.8-0.1.rc2.fc5 echoping-5.2.0-1.fc5 gnomesword-2.1.6-1.fc5 gourmet-0.8.5.14-2.fc5 ices-2.0.1-2.fc5 libsndfile-1.0.15-1.fc5 liferea-1.0.10-2.fc5 perl-Class-DBI-Loader-Relationship-1.3-2.fc5 perl-Class-DBI-Pager-0.08-1.fc5 perl-Class-DBI-Plugin-RetrieveAll-1.04-1.fc5 perl-ExtUtils-XSBuilder-0.28-1.fc5 perl-Gtk2-Spell-1.03-4.fc5 perl-Lingua-EN-Inflect-Number-1.1-4.fc5 perl-Log-Dispatch-FileRotate-1.14-1.fc5 perl-Log-Log4perl-1.04-2.fc5 perl-Module-Locate-1.7-1.fc5 perl-Test-SubCalls-0.05-1.fc5 perl-UNIVERSAL-exports-0.03-4.fc5 screem-0.16.1-1.fc5 smb4k-0.7.0-1.fc5 swh-plugins-0.4.14-6.fc5 tclhttpd-3.5.1-12.fc5 worminator-3.0R2.1-3.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 25 21:05:51 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:05:51 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060425210551.EBE83152151@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 35 R-2.3.0-1.fc6 R-2.3.0-2.fc6 amavisd-new-2.4.0-1.fc6 apt-0.5.15lorg3-1.fc6 comical-0.8-1.fc6 d4x-2.5.7.1-1.fc6 dia-0.95-1.fc6 dnsmasq-2.30-2.fc6 ebtables-2.0.8-0.1.rc2.fc6 erlang-esdl-0.95.0630-4.fc6 gnomesword-2.1.6-1.fc6 ices-2.0.1-2.fc6 libshout-2.2-1.fc6 libsndfile-1.0.15-1.fc6 pan-0.94-1.fc6 perl-Authen-Radius-0.12-2.fc6 perl-Cairo-0.03-2.fc6 perl-Class-DBI-Loader-Relationship-1.3-2.fc6 perl-Class-DBI-Pager-0.08-1.fc6 perl-Class-DBI-Plugin-RetrieveAll-1.04-1.fc6 perl-Data-HexDump-0.02-2.fc6 perl-ExtUtils-XSBuilder-0.28-1.fc6 perl-Gtk2-Spell-1.03-4.fc6 perl-Lingua-EN-Inflect-Number-1.1-4.fc6 perl-Log-Dispatch-FileRotate-1.14-1.fc6 perl-Log-Log4perl-1.04-2.fc6 perl-Module-Locate-1.7-1.fc6 perl-Test-SubCalls-0.05-1.fc6 perl-UNIVERSAL-exports-0.03-4.fc6 screem-0.16.1-1.fc6 smb4k-0.7.0-1.fc6 swh-plugins-0.4.14-6.fc6 tclhttpd-3.5.1-12.fc6 videodog-0.31-2.fc6 worminator-3.0R2.1-3.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From ville.skytta at iki.fi Tue Apr 25 21:16:09 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 00:16:09 +0300 Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report In-Reply-To: <20060425210551.EBE83152151@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> References: <20060425210551.EBE83152151@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1145999769.3018.69.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 17:05 -0400, buildsys at fedoraproject.org wrote: > Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 35 Not quite. The push attempt of this batch of packages hit some issues which are hopefully taken care of soon, but this time it might take a bit longer than usual until these packages are available in public repositories. FE[345] are affected too. From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Apr 25 21:19:49 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 22:19:49 +0100 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > So, my offering to unorphane Sodipodi seems to have raised a couple of > good questions. > > When should a package be removed and considered no longer maintainable? I would suggest the following: 1. If the package would fall under the legacy project and has been orphaned up to that point (sodipodi would be an example) 2. If the package has been abandoned upstream and the only way to bring it to a current FE would involve significant work (see below) 3. If the upstream has moved to a different version of (say) Java and to import using the current gcj stack would require a significant amount of work due to rewrite/backporting (see same thing below as for [2]) (2) and (3) come with the obvious caveat of "unless the new maintainer doesn't mind either taking on the main package or doing the rewrites" > How long without a release till considered inactive? You can't. I know of quite a few packages that are stable. z88dk and fuse-emulator are stable and it's been a while since the main branches have been updated. Neither though are inactive. > What lengths should someone go to, to confirm a project status? Email the current maintainer seems good. > Why Orphane a package that is considered EOL? Some packages, though EOL, should be kept purely on the merit of how good they are. > I know FE as it stands does not have a policy on this, perhaps its worth > knocking out some overall guidelines for the wiki? Sounds like a cunning plan! TTFN Paul -- Computer sind Klimaanlagen sehr ?hnlich: beide funktionieren, es sei denn man ?ffnet die Fenster -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 25 21:29:14 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:29:14 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060425212914.90AB615215C@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 1 videodog-0.31-2.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 25 21:29:27 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:29:27 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060425212927.97EA8152160@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 2 dnsmasq-2.30-2.fc5 videodog-0.31-2.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 25 21:29:23 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:29:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060425212923.F1F1E15215C@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 2 dnsmasq-2.30-2.fc4 videodog-0.31-2.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 25 21:29:36 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:29:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060425212936.BD63C152161@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 1 perl-PBS-0.31-1.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 25 21:48:30 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 09:48:30 +1200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> Paul wrote: > Hi, > >> So, my offering to unorphane Sodipodi seems to have raised a couple of >> good questions. >> >> When should a package be removed and considered no longer maintainable? > > I would suggest the following: > > 1. If the package would fall under the legacy project and has been > orphaned up to that point (sodipodi would be an example) > 2. If the package has been abandoned upstream and the only way to bring > it to a current FE would involve significant work (see below) > 3. If the upstream has moved to a different version of (say) Java and to > import using the current gcj stack would require a significant amount of > work due to rewrite/backporting (see same thing below as for [2]) > > (2) and (3) come with the obvious caveat of "unless the new maintainer > doesn't mind either taking on the main package or doing the rewrites" I spoke with a co worker of mine, who is a debian developer, on what debian does in these cases. He said that is up to the debian developer as to how long they want to maintain the package. He went on to say that as long as the application function and was free from release critical bugs, then debian will continue to ship it. He also said, that if a upstream vendor is not maintaining the application anymore (or seems not to be) then its up to the packager to fix bugs etc. I am not sure if other agree on that approach or not. >> How long without a release till considered inactive? > > You can't. I know of quite a few packages that are stable. z88dk and > fuse-emulator are stable and it's been a while since the main branches > have been updated. Neither though are inactive. Right. Perhaps time is a poor measurement of a projects status? Perhaps some other measurement should be made for determining this. >> What lengths should someone go to, to confirm a project status? > > Email the current maintainer seems good. Yep, did that before offering to take over the package. Did the same with monkey-bubble (which resulted in my fixed being applied to cvs) >> Why Orphane a package that is considered EOL? > > Some packages, though EOL, should be kept purely on the merit of how > good they are. My point was more, why orphan it if the general consensus is to drop it? Should it not be placed in a "dropped" list or something? >> I know FE as it stands does not have a policy on this, perhaps its worth >> knocking out some overall guidelines for the wiki? > > Sounds like a cunning plan! Indeed and useful to I would think Michael From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Apr 25 21:50:28 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 22:50:28 +0100 Subject: i386 binaries in the x86_64 directories In-Reply-To: <444E49EB.7040003@city-fan.org> References: <1145981019.15643.10.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <444E49EB.7040003@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <1146001828.21102.17.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > > The problem is this. When you compile mono from source, if you say > > --libdir=/usr/lib64, everything goes into /usr/lib64 happily and the .pc > > files go into /usr/lib64/pkgconfig. However, when compiling via a spec > > file, even if you define libdir as /usr/lib, bits move > > to /usr/lib64/pkgconfig and it doesn't matter what is passed in the % > > configure line. > > What are the Makefile lines responsible for installing the misplaced > files? Perhaps there's a make macro you can set to put them in the right > place? The problem is that the configure file is picking up the packages from whereever their .pc files are. For example, gtksourceview-sharp picks up gtksharp. gtksharp has it's pc file in /usr/lib irrespective of the architecture (as /usr/lib/pkgconfig/../..). The paths looks to be taken relative to where it finds the pkgconfig files. Problem comes if you're using a 64 bit machine. The .pc files end up in /usr/lib64 as that's where pkgconfig says to put things. However, the package expects things to be in /usr/lib/pkgconfig Is there a way to override pkgconfig so that it always goes to /usr/lib/pkgconfig. Failing that, my finding here supports my bug report that mono is packaged incorrectly for x86_64. TTFN Paul -- Computer sind Klimaanlagen sehr ?hnlich: beide funktionieren, es sei denn man ?ffnet die Fenster -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Apr 25 22:01:57 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:01:57 +0100 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > He said that is up to the debian developer as to how long they want to > maintain the package. He went on to say that as long as the application > function and was free from release critical bugs, then debian will > continue to ship it. He also said, that if a upstream vendor is not > maintaining the application anymore (or seems not to be) then its up to > the packager to fix bugs etc. > > I am not sure if other agree on that approach or not. No. I'm not in favour of this approach. IMO, it's actually what has kept Debian back as a distro. They have *way* too much legacy hanging around them which makes build times and build sizes insanely huge. I know I've fixed bugs on a few packages I package for FE on z88dk (especially) and have submitted them to the authors. However, doing this then starts to eat into other work. Sure it's fun, but is it worth it - especially if the upstream maintainer has dropped the package? > >> How long without a release till considered inactive? > > > > You can't. I know of quite a few packages that are stable. z88dk and > > fuse-emulator are stable and it's been a while since the main branches > > have been updated. Neither though are inactive. > > Right. Perhaps time is a poor measurement of a projects status? Perhaps > some other measurement should be made for determining this. Hard one. You can't go on version number or time. Possible answer is if there is a development branch, if that's dead then the package is possibly/probably dead. > >> Why Orphane a package that is considered EOL? > > > > Some packages, though EOL, should be kept purely on the merit of how > > good they are. > > My point was more, why orphan it if the general consensus is to drop it? > Should it not be placed in a "dropped" list or something? Again. lends weight to my point about the FL branch. If it's dropped into Legacy and you want to bring it back to a current branch, that's not a problem, but if it's in Legacy it can be effectively considered dropped. > >> I know FE as it stands does not have a policy on this, perhaps its worth > >> knocking out some overall guidelines for the wiki? > > > > Sounds like a cunning plan! > Indeed and useful to I would think Couldn't agree more. Can anyone who has a FE account set up a page? TTFN Paul -- Computer sind Klimaanlagen sehr ?hnlich: beide funktionieren, es sei denn man ?ffnet die Fenster -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From toshio at tiki-lounge.com Tue Apr 25 22:04:32 2006 From: toshio at tiki-lounge.com (Toshio Kuratomi) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:04:32 -0700 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1145963556.8204.39.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1145966858.986.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425123033.GA16754@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <1146002672.3139.39.camel@localhost> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 13:28 -0400, Max Spevack wrote: > On Tue, 25 Apr 2006, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 02:07:37PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > >> My point is: I sense not a single trace of democracy at RH and I sense > >> not a trace of supervision/monitoring/control of the community over the > >> boards inaugurated by RH. > > I need to chime in here a little bit. > > I don't quite understand what the second part of your sentance means, but > as to the first point -- seriously? You see *not a single trace* of > democracy in the way Red Hat handles Fedora? > > How can you say that when Fedora Extras itself is a major piece of that > democracy? Thorsten is your chair -- he's not a Red Hat employee. How > can you say that when Red Hat is adopting *internally* the packaging > guidelines that came out of the Fedora Extras work? You feel like Extras > doesn't have influence? You feel like FESCO (which drives Extras) doesn't > make an impact or influence the way things are done? > democracy != community. That said, I don't know that a lack of democracy hurts us right now. In the past Red Hat was not as engaged with the community and democracy seemed like the route to more openness. Today, Fedora is much more involved in allowing community into the decision making process. I don't think mandating community voting has the same pressure as before. OTOH, the community-orientation of today's Red Hat may change in the future. If that happens, we'd be better off having codified some sort of democratic model of decision making today so that it doesn't have as much of an impact later. So if we're building a Fedora that we want to still be a community driven distribution ten years from now, establishing voting procedures as the method of selecting our leaders is very important. -Toshio -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 25 22:19:11 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 10:19:11 +1200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <444EA05F.10306@knox.net.nz> Paul wrote: > Hi, > >> He said that is up to the debian developer as to how long they want to >> maintain the package. He went on to say that as long as the application >> function and was free from release critical bugs, then debian will >> continue to ship it. He also said, that if a upstream vendor is not >> maintaining the application anymore (or seems not to be) then its up to >> the packager to fix bugs etc. >> >> I am not sure if other agree on that approach or not. > > No. I'm not in favour of this approach. IMO, it's actually what has kept > Debian back as a distro. They have *way* too much legacy hanging around > them which makes build times and build sizes insanely huge. I know I've > fixed bugs on a few packages I package for FE on z88dk (especially) and > have submitted them to the authors. However, doing this then starts to > eat into other work. > > Sure it's fun, but is it worth it - especially if the upstream > maintainer has dropped the package? Agreed. I only asked him to find a grounding for what others are doing. >>>> How long without a release till considered inactive? >>> You can't. I know of quite a few packages that are stable. z88dk and >>> fuse-emulator are stable and it's been a while since the main branches >>> have been updated. Neither though are inactive. >> Right. Perhaps time is a poor measurement of a projects status? Perhaps >> some other measurement should be made for determining this. > > Hard one. You can't go on version number or time. Possible answer is if > there is a development branch, if that's dead then the package is > possibly/probably dead. Perhaps failed attempts to contact the lead dev or any other dev too? I think all reasonable efforts should be made to contact and confirm the status of a project. That said, there has to be a certain degree of discretion on the packagers side (or potential packager). If a package is unmaintained upstream, but remains bug free and useful, then why should its package maintenance change? >>>> Why Orphane a package that is considered EOL? >>> Some packages, though EOL, should be kept purely on the merit of how >>> good they are. >> My point was more, why orphan it if the general consensus is to drop it? >> Should it not be placed in a "dropped" list or something? > > Again. lends weight to my point about the FL branch. If it's dropped > into Legacy and you want to bring it back to a current branch, that's > not a problem, but if it's in Legacy it can be effectively considered > dropped. Then we need an orphaned list and a legacy list. orphaned = maintainable, but with out a maintainer legacy = unmaintainable and with out a maintainer Grouping them together just leads to people offering to take ownership of a package that nobody wants maintained ;) >>>> I know FE as it stands does not have a policy on this, perhaps its worth >>>> knocking out some overall guidelines for the wiki? >>> Sounds like a cunning plan! > >> Indeed and useful to I would think > > Couldn't agree more. Can anyone who has a FE account set up a page? I can do this. If there is also no objection, perhaps we can start a legacy packages page also, to house unmaintainable packages? Michael From toshio at tiki-lounge.com Tue Apr 25 22:20:30 2006 From: toshio at tiki-lounge.com (Toshio Kuratomi) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:20:30 -0700 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <1146003630.3139.48.camel@localhost> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 23:01 +0100, Paul wrote: > Hi, > > > He said that is up to the debian developer as to how long they want to > > maintain the package. He went on to say that as long as the application > > function and was free from release critical bugs, then debian will > > continue to ship it. He also said, that if a upstream vendor is not > > maintaining the application anymore (or seems not to be) then its up to > > the packager to fix bugs etc. > > > > I am not sure if other agree on that approach or not. > > No. I'm not in favour of this approach. IMO, it's actually what has kept > Debian back as a distro. They have *way* too much legacy hanging around > them which makes build times and build sizes insanely huge. I know I've > fixed bugs on a few packages I package for FE on z88dk (especially) and > have submitted them to the authors. However, doing this then starts to > eat into other work. > > Sure it's fun, but is it worth it - especially if the upstream > maintainer has dropped the package? In the context of Fedora Extras, I would agree with the Debian policies on this point. It's not for Fedora as a whole to decide if a package is worth it... it's up to the packager. However, the packager has to realize that in doing this, they are picking up the reins for upstream (which may be a lot more work than simply packaging the application.) Is there a time when a packager should be forced to drop a package? It sounds like Debian has decided that "release critical bugs" are their qualification. Defining this based on bugs makes sense to me as well -- if the package is high enough quality that it continues to build and run then there's no sense abandoning it. If it has serious bugs and the packager is not able to fix it and there is no upstream to help out, then the software should not be shipped. -Toshio -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From jspaleta at gmail.com Tue Apr 25 22:21:43 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 18:21:43 -0400 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <444EA05F.10306@knox.net.nz> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> <444EA05F.10306@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <604aa7910604251521r2216718gcacdba7b55abc803@mail.gmail.com> On 4/25/06, Michael J. Knox wrote: > legacy = unmaintainable and with out a maintainer that is a poor definition given the fact that that definition of the word does not fit at all with what the fedora legacy project does. Pick a different word that does not cause confusion between what the current fedora legacy project does and what you are trying to describe. -jef From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 25 22:25:58 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 10:25:58 +1200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <604aa7910604251521r2216718gcacdba7b55abc803@mail.gmail.com> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> <444EA05F.10306@knox.net.nz> <604aa7910604251521r2216718gcacdba7b55abc803@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <444EA1F6.8080600@knox.net.nz> Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 4/25/06, Michael J. Knox wrote: >> legacy = unmaintainable and with out a maintainer > > that is a poor definition given the fact that that definition of the > word does not fit at all with what the fedora legacy project does. > Pick a different word that does not cause confusion between what the > current fedora legacy project does and what you are trying to > describe. > Sure, this thread is about ideas and suggestion. So, do you have any suggestion for it? Perhaps "retired packages" is a better fit? Michael From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 25 22:25:13 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 18:25:13 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060425222513.AFE72152162@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 1 xemacs-21.5.26-4.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 25 22:25:05 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 18:25:05 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060425222505.9834F152161@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 1 erlang-esdl-0.95.0630-4.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 25 22:25:02 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 18:25:02 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060425222502.0012315215C@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 1 dnsmasq-2.30-2.fc3.2 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Apr 25 22:25:07 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 18:25:07 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060425222507.82251152160@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 1 erlang-esdl-0.95.0630-5.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Tue Apr 25 22:41:44 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (Paul) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:41:44 +0100 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <444EA1F6.8080600@knox.net.nz> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> <444EA05F.10306@knox.net.nz> <604aa7910604251521r2216718gcacdba7b55abc803@mail.gmail.com> <444EA1F6.8080600@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <1146004904.14004.2.camel@T7.Linux> Hi, > Perhaps "retired packages" is a better fit? Dropped packages? TTFN Paul -- Computer sind Klimaanlagen sehr ?hnlich: beide funktionieren, es sei denn man ?ffnet die Fenster -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Tue Apr 25 22:44:12 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 00:44:12 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 25 Apr 2006 19:40:18 +0200." <1145986818.2325.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <200604252244.k3PMiDKO030838@mx3.redhat.com> fedora at leemhuis.info said: > we still have no system how to actually do the FESCo vote One thing is still not clear to me: who can vote ? - any bloke with access to a keyboard ? - any fedora related ml member ? - f-e-l list members ? - contributors with a signed cla ? I'd prefer to limit votes to people members of f-e-l... crazy idea of the day: how hard would it be to hack the mailman options page "fedora-extras-list mailing list membership configuration for me at myplace.org" to allow people to simply put their vote in a dedicated field in there ? Cheers, Christian From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 25 22:49:13 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 10:49:13 +1200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <200604252244.k3PMiDKO030838@mx3.redhat.com> References: <200604252244.k3PMiDKO030838@mx3.redhat.com> Message-ID: <444EA769.20602@knox.net.nz> Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > fedora at leemhuis.info said: >> we still have no system how to actually do the FESCo vote > > One thing is still not clear to me: who can vote ? > - any bloke with access to a keyboard ? > - any fedora related ml member ? > - f-e-l list members ? > - contributors with a signed cla ? > > I'd prefer to limit votes to people members of f-e-l... > I would prefer it left to those that had fedora extras accounts. Michael From pertusus at free.fr Tue Apr 25 22:52:16 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 00:52:16 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <444EA05F.10306@knox.net.nz> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> <444EA05F.10306@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <20060425224642.GB2364@free.fr> > orphaned = maintainable, but with out a maintainer > legacy = unmaintainable and with out a maintainer legacy (use any other better name) could also be unmaintainable in devel branch but with a maintainer. So the package could still be maintained but would not have a devel or a new fc directory in cvs. So it would be a co-maintainership if somebody steps up to maintain it for devel. > If there is also no objection, perhaps we can start a legacy packages > page also, to house unmaintainable packages? You mean unmaintainable in devel? Otherwise it is just orphaned. -- Pat From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Tue Apr 25 23:00:46 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 19:00:46 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <200604252244.k3PMiDKO030838@mx3.redhat.com> References: <200604252244.k3PMiDKO030838@mx3.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1146006046.4082.2.camel@cutter> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 00:44 +0200, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > fedora at leemhuis.info said: > > we still have no system how to actually do the FESCo vote > > One thing is still not clear to me: who can vote ? > - any bloke with access to a keyboard ? > - any fedora related ml member ? > - f-e-l list members ? > - contributors with a signed cla ? > > I'd prefer to limit votes to people members of f-e-l... votes should be for contributors with a signed cla and submitted gpg key. That's the only way we'll verify people so one person == one vote. -sv From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 25 23:00:07 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 11:00:07 +1200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <20060425224642.GB2364@free.fr> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> <444EA05F.10306@knox.net.nz> <20060425224642.GB2364@free.fr> Message-ID: <444EA9F7.6060803@knox.net.nz> Patrice Dumas wrote: >> orphaned = maintainable, but with out a maintainer >> legacy = unmaintainable and with out a maintainer > > legacy (use any other better name) could also be unmaintainable in devel > branch but with a maintainer. So the package could still be maintained > but would not have a devel or a new fc directory in cvs. So it would be > a co-maintainership if somebody steps up to maintain it for devel. > >> If there is also no objection, perhaps we can start a legacy packages >> page also, to house unmaintainable packages? > > You mean unmaintainable in devel? Otherwise it is just orphaned. I think "legacy" is confusing what I am meaning. So I will refer to it as dropped/retired. orphaned = no maintainer dropped/retired = no maintainer and unmaintainable That is my suggestion. If a package has a maintainer, then it does not need to be listed as an orphaned/dropped/retired package. If a package has a maintainer and is unmaintainable, then that's the packagers problem to resolve. I am wanting to make it clearer which packages are orphaned, which ones have been dropped/retired and clearly defining how a package gets a dropped/retired status. Michael From toshio at tiki-lounge.com Tue Apr 25 23:05:09 2006 From: toshio at tiki-lounge.com (Toshio Kuratomi) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 16:05:09 -0700 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <200604252244.k3PMiDKO030838@mx3.redhat.com> References: <200604252244.k3PMiDKO030838@mx3.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1146006309.3139.58.camel@localhost> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 00:44 +0200, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > fedora at leemhuis.info said: > > we still have no system how to actually do the FESCo vote > > One thing is still not clear to me: who can vote ? > - any bloke with access to a keyboard ? > - any fedora related ml member ? > - f-e-l list members ? > - contributors with a signed cla ? > To have gpg verification, they need to be in the accounts system with a gpg key registered. So the signed cla group above is the closest to qualifying. Note that docs volunteers and others have signed CLAs, not just Extras packagers. If you want to be even stricter about who votes you'd want something like "has an entry in owners.list". Or belongs to the cvsextras group in Accounts. -Toshio -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From pertusus at free.fr Tue Apr 25 23:07:11 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 01:07:11 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <444EA9F7.6060803@knox.net.nz> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> <444EA05F.10306@knox.net.nz> <20060425224642.GB2364@free.fr> <444EA9F7.6060803@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <20060425230711.GC2364@free.fr> > orphaned = no maintainer > dropped/retired = no maintainer and unmaintainable I don't see a clear distinction. For me both are orphaned. In the second case it will require more work for a potential maintainer, or maybe the potential maintainer won't push it to devel/newer fc versions, but I don't understand why there is a need to make 2 separate cases? > If a package has a maintainer and is unmaintainable, then that's the > packagers problem to resolve. Sure, but a way to resolve it could be to say: I don't push that package to the devel branch. This should also be marked somewhere. But this may not be what you are talking about. > I am wanting to make it clearer which packages are orphaned, which ones > have been dropped/retired and clearly defining how a package gets a > dropped/retired status. You mean that you would like to distinguish among orphaned package some that are broken and should also be removed from previous releases, where they exist as binary packages, and so remove the binary packages from repo? -- Pat From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Tue Apr 25 23:19:46 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 01:19:46 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 25 Apr 2006 19:00:46 EDT." <1146006046.4082.2.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <200604252319.k3PNJsv5005452@mx3.redhat.com> skvidal at linux.duke.edu said: > votes should be for contributors with a signed cla and submitted gpg key. > That's the only way we'll verify people so one person == one vote. Right. In that case... I'll admit upfront I have no experience with this kind of vote. But here is my naive proposal: 1. create a list of candidates in a plain text file, one candidate per line 2. post the file on f-e-l 3. instruct people to only keep 13 names (or whatever is decided) in their list, kept one per line, and delete the other names. No other editing than deleting entire lines. 4. people have to clearsign the text file with the GPG key from the cla 5. people send back the clearsigned text file to a gathering email address, or upload on a web or wiki page To count the votes: 1. gather all the received clearsigned text files 2. keep only those where signature is verified through the cla keys 3. ensure number of lines in each file <= 13, throw away bad ones 4. ensure there are no duplicated lines "sort | uniq -c | grep -v ' 1 '" (unless you want to allow vote cumulating) 5. global "sort | uniq -c" and you have results... Time for bed here... Cheers, Christian From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 25 23:26:57 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 11:26:57 +1200 Subject: iFolder server In-Reply-To: <20060424080216.91468.qmail@web25601.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20060424080216.91468.qmail@web25601.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <444EB041.2040007@knox.net.nz> SOYER Jerome wrote: > Hi, > > I'm interesting to work on it, but for Mandriva and Fedora, i use this > two distro. > > Where can i find your srpms or the spec file ? I filed a bug report for it, but don't touch that srpm as I missed some things that directly affects ability to work. I will hopefully have a new srpm up today time permitting. Michael From michael at knox.net.nz Tue Apr 25 23:35:35 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 11:35:35 +1200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <20060425230711.GC2364@free.fr> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> <444EA05F.10306@knox.net.nz> <20060425224642.GB2364@free.fr> <444EA9F7.6060803@knox.net.nz> <20060425230711.GC2364@free.fr> Message-ID: <444EB247.1080104@knox.net.nz> Patrice Dumas wrote: >> orphaned = no maintainer >> dropped/retired = no maintainer and unmaintainable > > I don't see a clear distinction. For me both are orphaned. In the second > case it will require more work for a potential maintainer, or maybe the > potential maintainer won't push it to devel/newer fc versions, but I > don't understand why there is a need to make 2 separate cases? A package that has been declared dropped/retired by its former maintainer or by a Fedora Extras house keeper, can be "undropped/unretired" should someone from the Fedora Legacy group choose to take ownership of it. People come out of retirement all the time, why not software too? The distinction should be made (between orphan of dropped/retired) based on the upstream at the time a packager abandons a package. > >> If a package has a maintainer and is unmaintainable, then that's the >> packagers problem to resolve. > > Sure, but a way to resolve it could be to say: I don't push that package > to the devel branch. This should also be marked somewhere. But this may > not be what you are talking about. See above. It becomes the responsibility of the packager to determine which branches get pushed out too. >> I am wanting to make it clearer which packages are orphaned, which ones >> have been dropped/retired and clearly defining how a package gets a >> dropped/retired status. > > You mean that you would like to distinguish among orphaned package some > that are broken and should also be removed from previous releases, where > they exist as binary packages, and so remove the binary packages from > repo? Yes, that should be considered too. A package with no maintainer and no upstream development has the potential to be a security risk and introduce bugs. Who is going to fix a security issue? Who is going to fix bugs filed against it? Think of it as an extended QA for FE. Michael From bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Apr 25 23:40:24 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 01:40:24 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 07:35:14 +1200, Michael J. Knox wrote: > So, my offering to unorphane Sodipodi seems to have raised a couple of > good questions. > > When should a package be removed and considered no longer maintainable? > > How long without a release till considered inactive? > > What lengths should someone go to, to confirm a project status? > > Why Orphane a package that is considered EOL? > > I know FE as it stands does not have a policy on this, perhaps its worth > knocking out some overall guidelines for the wiki? > > Thoughts? I'm afraid I misunderstand several of your questions. So, one by one: Package "sodipodi" has not been built since FC-3. It is not clear when exactly its original maintainer orphaned all his packages. However, he stopped working on sodipodi in favour of inkscape (which had started as a fork of sodipodi and has been more active/successful since then -- last release of sodipodi is over two years old). Every package in Fedora Extras, i.e. every package with binaries published in the repository, must have at least one maintainer listed in the owners.list file. So far, policies about orphans have been lax or non-existent as to give potential contributors the opportunity to evaluate orphans and pick them up more easily. However, I think the time has come to delete orphans from the repository more regularly and in accordance with a well-defined policy. Else the list of orphans will grow as we continue in "devel" and old orphans exist only in the old branches. I'm a proponent of the all-or-nothing strategy: orphaned binaries are deleted from all active (i.e. still supported branches). Once a new maintainer is found, he could update and publish new builds. From jima at beer.tclug.org Tue Apr 25 23:45:31 2006 From: jima at beer.tclug.org (Jima) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 18:45:31 -0500 (CDT) Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <200604252319.k3PNJsv5005452@mx3.redhat.com> References: <200604252319.k3PNJsv5005452@mx3.redhat.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 26 Apr 2006, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > 5. global "sort | uniq -c" and you have results... | sort -rn | head -20 I'd say `head -13`, but if there are ties...tricky detail. :) Jima From seg at haxxed.com Tue Apr 25 23:54:46 2006 From: seg at haxxed.com (Callum Lerwick) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 18:54:46 -0500 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <1146009288.22802.137.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 09:48 +1200, Michael J. Knox wrote: > He said that is up to the debian developer as to how long they want to > maintain the package. He went on to say that as long as the application > function and was free from release critical bugs, then debian will > continue to ship it. He also said, that if a upstream vendor is not > maintaining the application anymore (or seems not to be) then its up to > the packager to fix bugs etc. > > I am not sure if other agree on that approach or not. +1 Y'all are over-thinking this. The upstream status of a package simply doesn't matter. What matters is if it is maintained in *extras*. If a packager wants to spend their time and energy maintaining a package that's abandoned upstream, that's their business. There's no reason to remove a package simply because its abandoned upstream. All that matters is that the package continues to meet the requirements that *any* package has. If a package has broken deps, or is unusably buggy, it should be pulled from the repos, no matter what the upstream status of the package is. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From seg at haxxed.com Wed Apr 26 00:03:26 2006 From: seg at haxxed.com (Callum Lerwick) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 19:03:26 -0500 Subject: Sponsorship process In-Reply-To: <200604250608.k3P68A7V021583@mx3.redhat.com> References: <200604250608.k3P68A7V021583@mx3.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1146009807.22802.139.camel@localhost.localdomain> I wish the Fedora wiki had talk pages, like MediaWiki has. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From pertusus at free.fr Wed Apr 26 00:04:11 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 02:04:11 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <444EB247.1080104@knox.net.nz> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> <444EA05F.10306@knox.net.nz> <20060425224642.GB2364@free.fr> <444EA9F7.6060803@knox.net.nz> <20060425230711.GC2364@free.fr> <444EB247.1080104@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <20060426000411.GD2364@free.fr> > A package that has been declared dropped/retired by its former > maintainer or by a Fedora Extras house keeper, can be > "undropped/unretired" should someone from the Fedora Legacy group choose > to take ownership of it. Why from the Fedora Legacy group? Why not any packager? > People come out of retirement all the time, why not software too? But that's exactly the same than for orphaned packages? They may be unorphaned... > The distinction should be made (between orphan of dropped/retired) based > on the upstream at the time a packager abandons a package. If it is just an informational distinction, then it may only be in the orphan pages in the comment? > See above. It becomes the responsibility of the packager to determine > which branches get pushed out too. Sorry but I don't get it... Maybe to make things clearer I'll propose the following scenarios, hoping to catch all the possibilities. I consider that FCn is the current FC release, FCn+1 is devel, and next releases, FCn-x is the first release that is associated with a fedora core eol (n-x = 3 today), FCn-z is the first release to be associated with a fedora core eol which has been dropped from fedora core legacy. I take as granted that no package is maintained for version FCn-z and older. I also assume that an extras package maintainer has to take care of version FCn. I see the following possibility: 1) A maintainer don't want to maintain a package in extras for any version 2) A maintainer don't want to maintain a package in extras for FCn+1 and newer 3) A maintainer don't want to maintain a package in extras for FCn-x and older 4) A maintainer don't want to maintain a package in extras for FCn-1 and older For me the first one is an orphaned package. The other are not orphaned packages, but a co-maintainer is needed for versions that the primary maintainer don't want to maintain. A difference could be made for packages where a version allread exists for FCn-1 and older and those where such a version doesn't exist, but I don't think it is the issue here. In that picture I see the unmaintainable packages as a special case of 2), because in other cases the package allready exist, so it cannot be unmaintainable. It may also be a special case of 1) as 1) implies 2). But I fail to see why they deserve a specific treatment. Now another question is what to do with existing packages for unmaintained version. Should the built rpms be removed from the repo? This is an interesting question but that question seems to me to be unrelated to the other questions. I believe they shouldn't be removed from the repo, but that's just my personal opinion. -- Pat From michael at knox.net.nz Wed Apr 26 00:19:00 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 12:19:00 +1200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <444EBC74.5050407@knox.net.nz> Michael Schwendt wrote: > So far, policies about orphans have been lax or non-existent as to give > potential contributors the opportunity to evaluate orphans and pick them > up more easily. However, I think the time has come to delete orphans from > the repository more regularly and in accordance with a well-defined > policy. Else the list of orphans will grow as we continue in "devel" and > old orphans exist only in the old branches. I'm a proponent of the > all-or-nothing strategy: orphaned binaries are deleted from all active > (i.e. still supported branches). Once a new maintainer is found, he > could update and publish new builds. Exactly. I am wanting to see a better way of handling orphans and what I consider (I say I, cuz my point doesn't seem to be clear to some) to be retired packages. Michael From pertusus at free.fr Wed Apr 26 00:19:58 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 02:19:58 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060426001958.GE2364@free.fr> > Else the list of orphans will grow as we continue in "devel" and > old orphans exist only in the old branches. I don't really understand this sentence. Do you mean that the number of orphaned packages that don't have a devel branch (and, as time goes by, that don't have branches for branches that are newer than the branch that was active at the time the package was orphaned) will only grow? That seems to be quite normal, as long as fedora extras grow. Those packages will only disapear when all the fedora extras packages for a their newest branch are retired (maybe because the fedora core legacy has ceased to exist for that branch). Is it an issue? > I'm a proponent of the > all-or-nothing strategy: orphaned binaries are deleted from all active > (i.e. still supported branches). Once a new maintainer is found, he It will only prevent people from doing new installs, allready installed orphaned packages will still be there. So I con't see what's wrong with keeping them. But I don't see anything clearly wrong with removing them either. What do you exactly mean by supported? Do you mean branches associated with a fedora core version that is not eol? > could update and publish new builds. -- Pat From michael at knox.net.nz Wed Apr 26 00:39:42 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 12:39:42 +1200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <20060426001958.GE2364@free.fr> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060426001958.GE2364@free.fr> Message-ID: <444EC14E.3020608@knox.net.nz> You need to stop thinking in terms of branches etc. an orphan status is black and white has a maintainer or it doesn't It has nothing to do with which branch it may end up in if someone takes ownership of the orphan. Michael Patrice Dumas wrote: >> Else the list of orphans will grow as we continue in "devel" and >> old orphans exist only in the old branches. > > I don't really understand this sentence. Do you mean that the number > of orphaned packages that don't have a devel branch (and, as time goes > by, that don't have branches for branches that are newer than the branch > that was active at the time the package was orphaned) will only grow? > That seems to be quite normal, as long as fedora extras grow. Those > packages will only disapear when all the fedora extras packages for a > their newest branch are retired (maybe because the fedora core legacy has > ceased to exist for that branch). Is it an issue? > >> I'm a proponent of the >> all-or-nothing strategy: orphaned binaries are deleted from all active >> (i.e. still supported branches). Once a new maintainer is found, he > > It will only prevent people from doing new installs, allready installed > orphaned packages will still be there. So I con't see what's wrong > with keeping them. But I don't see anything clearly wrong with removing > them either. > > What do you exactly mean by supported? Do you mean branches associated > with a fedora core version that is not eol? > >> could update and publish new builds. > > -- > Pat > From imipak at yahoo.com Wed Apr 26 03:10:37 2006 From: imipak at yahoo.com (Jonathan Day) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 20:10:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Two quick questions Message-ID: <20060426031037.56760.qmail@web31514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> First off, is the RPM for mhash being maintained? It seems to be several versions off the one on sourceforge now. Second, I'm finding a bunch of packages I'd love to contribute .spec/srpm files for - but am faced with Evil Provider Syndrome, which makes putting the files in a public place a tough problem. I'm sure I'm not the only one to face The Curse. Are there any Benign Holders of the Disks who would be willing to work something out with me, there? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From jima at beer.tclug.org Wed Apr 26 03:31:57 2006 From: jima at beer.tclug.org (Jima) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 22:31:57 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Two quick questions In-Reply-To: <20060426031037.56760.qmail@web31514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060426031037.56760.qmail@web31514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 25 Apr 2006, Jonathan Day wrote: > First off, is the RPM for mhash being maintained? It > seems to be several versions off the one on > sourceforge now. According to owners.list, bugs.michael at gmx.net is likely the address to harass. ;) > Second, I'm finding a bunch of packages I'd love to > contribute .spec/srpm files for - but am faced with > Evil Provider Syndrome, which makes putting the files > in a public place a tough problem. I'm sure I'm not > the only one to face The Curse. Are there any Benign > Holders of the Disks who would be willing to work > something out with me, there? Sure, email me off-list; I think we can work something out. Jima From fedora at leemhuis.info Wed Apr 26 04:46:32 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 06:46:32 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1146006046.4082.2.camel@cutter> References: <200604252244.k3PMiDKO030838@mx3.redhat.com> <1146006046.4082.2.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1146026792.11788.2.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Dienstag, den 25.04.2006, 19:00 -0400 schrieb seth vidal: > On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 00:44 +0200, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > > fedora at leemhuis.info said: > > > we still have no system how to actually do the FESCo vote > > > > One thing is still not clear to me: who can vote ? > > - any bloke with access to a keyboard ? > > - any fedora related ml member ? > > - f-e-l list members ? > > - contributors with a signed cla ? > > > > I'd prefer to limit votes to people members of f-e-l... > > votes should be for contributors with a signed cla and submitted gpg > key. "contributors" = "all Fedora contributors with a signed cla in the accounts system" or "all members of the group cvsextras and a signed cla in the accounts system"? CU thl From fedora at leemhuis.info Wed Apr 26 04:52:02 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 06:52:02 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <20060425180134.GI9533@neu.nirvana> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060425171322.GF9533@neu.nirvana> <1145986818.2325.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060425180134.GI9533@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1146027122.11788.7.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Dienstag, den 25.04.2006, 20:01 +0200 schrieb Axel Thimm: > On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 07:40:18PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Dienstag, den 25.04.2006, 19:13 +0200 schrieb Axel Thimm: > > > If fesco feels on some specific issue at hand that it is too small in > > > numbers to make a decision it can always escalate to the next larger > > > entity to get more opinions like it is happening now. > > > > I would prefer if nearly all discussion would be on public > > places. Yes, that leads to sometimes endlessly discussion like this > > [...]. But openness IMHO is more important. > > I wasn't suggesting on going behind doors, I completely agree on > transparency and openness towards the outside of fesco. > > A model that may keep fesco workload low could be the following: > > o the community/fesco has some suggestions, these are evaluated by > fesco and discussed with the community with a given time cut-off, > where fesco has to come to a conclusion. All this happens in public, > but if the discussion doesn't reach a consensus you have the time > cut-off, where fesco members simply vote on the issue. > > o When a decision is made to attack something then fesco can decide to > create a task force to actually perform the work, e.g. outsource the > workload, and move on. > > o More often than not these task forces will be people from fesco or > at least headed by them who should gather forces from the community, > e.g. by calling for volunteers on a list this this one. > > Does that make any sense? [...] Yes, something like this makes sense. But I still think we need at least 13 members because I got the impression in the past months that each "task force" really wants (and maybe needs) a bit guidance or help from at FESCo. And more people can guide more task forces. CU thl From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Wed Apr 26 09:48:49 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 11:48:49 +0200 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) Message-ID: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> Hi, where is the right place to discuss kernel modules, this list? I know most people are weared out on the subject, and probably don't want to hear about it anymore. Still, ATrpms has a bunchful of useful kernel modules that would fit in very well. The dilemma is, that the methology used at ATrpms differs in some fundamental design parts from what is the current proposal, mostly the one spec/src.rpm for both userland and kmdl builds and simple unprepared upstream Sources:, and further derived concept bits. ATrpms' concept also supports RHEL3 and earlier FCs and even RHL releases (e.g. not dependending on availability of kernel-devel which doesn't exist for these distributions). So my options are o convince people about adopting ATrpms' methology good: field-proven, easy maintenance, many users already accustomed to kmdls, works on RHEL3 and legacy, too bad: Thorsten has put a lot of work in the current proposal, different buildsystem adaption, danger of endless discussions o fork packages (RHEL3 and legacy in ATrpms, other here) good: all the bad above reversed bad: double maintain them o do nothing good: no work ;) bad: no packages :/ Maybe a compromise may look like o Allow ATrpms' methology to enter the system o Allow kmdls to get submitted/reviewed o Modify the methology w/o breaking RHEL3/legacy stuff and w/o breaking the user's interfacing (but potentially break the packagers' interface if a better macro system is developed) e.g. if the basic properties of the kmdl system are acceptable (mostly the one src.rpm with upstream sources for all builds), then let's get it into the system to start improving it. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 26 10:29:52 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 10:29:52 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-26 Message-ID: <20060426102952.5003.5764@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 sqlite-tcl 2.8.16-1.i386 stripesnoop-devel 1.5-2.fc3.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 sqlite-tcl 2.8.16-1.x86_64 stripesnoop-devel 1.5-2.fc3.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: sqlite-tcl - 2.8.16-1.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: sqlite = 0:2.8.16-1 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: stripesnoop-devel - 1.5-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: stripesnoop = 0:1.5-2.fc3 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: stripesnoop-devel - 1.5-2.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: stripesnoop = 0:1.5-2.fc3 package: sqlite-tcl - 2.8.16-1.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: sqlite = 0:2.8.16-1 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 26 10:29:55 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 10:29:55 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-26 Message-ID: <20060426102955.5006.60991@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch rpy 0.4.6-7.fc4.i386 scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch rpy 0.4.6-7.fc4.ppc scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch rpy 0.4.6-7.fc4.x86_64 scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.x86_64 ====================================================================== New report for: jamatos AT fc.up.pt package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 ====================================================================== package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.0.0-3.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.0.0-3.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9()(64bit) package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.0.0-3.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 26 10:29:58 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 10:29:58 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-26 Message-ID: <20060426102958.5007.61209@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rpy 0.4.6-7.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rpy 0.4.6-7.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rpy 0.4.6-7.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== New report for: jamatos AT fc.up.pt package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 26 10:30:00 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 10:30:00 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-26 Message-ID: <20060426103000.5009.53389@faldor.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 rpy 0.4.6-7.fc5.i386 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc rpy 0.4.6-7.fc5.ppc sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 rpy 0.4.6-7.fc5.x86_64 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libglade libgnomeui.so.32 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0 libobby-0.3.so.0 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomeui.so.32 libzvt.so.2 package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) gnome-libs libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libobby-0.3.so.0()(64bit) package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomeui.so.32 libzvt.so.2 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libglade libgnomeui.so.32 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0 libobby-0.3.so.0 package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Wed Apr 26 11:05:28 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 12:05:28 +0100 Subject: Getting pkgconfig to always point to /usr/lib/pkgconfig Message-ID: <1146049528.23639.28.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, I know that I can %define _libdir to point to /usr/lib easily enough irrespective of the platform, but is there a way to do this with pkgconfig (i.e. always go to /usr/lib/pkgconfig)? TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From mitr at volny.cz Wed Apr 26 11:14:02 2006 From: mitr at volny.cz (Miloslav Trmac) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 13:14:02 +0200 Subject: Getting pkgconfig to always point to /usr/lib/pkgconfig In-Reply-To: <1146049528.23639.28.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1146049528.23639.28.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <444F55FA.4060004@volny.cz> Hello, PFJ napsal(a): > I know that I can %define _libdir to point to /usr/lib easily enough > irrespective of the platform, but is there a way to do this with > pkgconfig (i.e. always go to /usr/lib/pkgconfig)? You can use /usr/share/pkgconfig for arch-independent .pc files. Mirek From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Wed Apr 26 11:17:30 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 12:17:30 +0100 Subject: Getting pkgconfig to always point to /usr/lib/pkgconfig In-Reply-To: <444F55FA.4060004@volny.cz> References: <1146049528.23639.28.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <444F55FA.4060004@volny.cz> Message-ID: <1146050250.23639.30.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, > > I know that I can %define _libdir to point to /usr/lib easily enough > > irrespective of the platform, but is there a way to do this with > > pkgconfig (i.e. always go to /usr/lib/pkgconfig)? > You can use /usr/share/pkgconfig for arch-independent .pc files. Will that be picked up though if your configure script needs that package? TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Wed Apr 26 12:06:24 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 08:06:24 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1146026792.11788.2.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <200604252244.k3PMiDKO030838@mx3.redhat.com> <1146006046.4082.2.camel@cutter> <1146026792.11788.2.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <1146053184.4866.27.camel@cutter> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 06:46 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > "contributors" = "all Fedora contributors with a signed cla in the > accounts system" or "all members of the group cvsextras and a signed cla > in the accounts system"? For fesco elections I'd say members of cvsextras and a signed cla. -sv From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 26 12:47:47 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:47:47 +0200 Subject: Two quick questions In-Reply-To: <20060426031037.56760.qmail@web31514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060426031037.56760.qmail@web31514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060426144747.cbf560a8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 20:10:37 -0700 (PDT), Jonathan Day wrote: > First off, is the RPM for mhash being maintained? Yes. > It seems to be several versions off the one on > sourceforge now. So what? The recent ones broke too much for my taste. You can read a bit about on upstream's mailing-list and in their bug tracker. A few questionable/unfinished things have been introduced, too. From thomas at apestaart.org Wed Apr 26 13:41:57 2006 From: thomas at apestaart.org (Thomas Vander Stichele) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 15:41:57 +0200 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1146058917.2555.37.camel@otto.amantes> > The dilemma is, that the methology used at ATrpms differs in some > fundamental design parts from what is the current proposal, mostly the > one spec/src.rpm for both userland and kmdl builds and simple > unprepared upstream Sources:, and further derived concept > bits. > > ATrpms' concept also supports RHEL3 and earlier FCs and even RHL > releases (e.g. not dependending on availability of kernel-devel which > doesn't exist for these distributions). > > So my options are > > o convince people about adopting ATrpms' methology > good: field-proven, easy maintenance, many users already accustomed > to kmdls, works on RHEL3 and legacy, too > bad: Thorsten has put a lot of work in the current proposal, > different buildsystem adaption, danger of endless discussions So why have this discussion *now* and not when thl and ville were working on it ? Thomas From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Wed Apr 26 14:22:56 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:22:56 +0200 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <1146058917.2555.37.camel@otto.amantes> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> <1146058917.2555.37.camel@otto.amantes> Message-ID: <20060426142256.GL17533@neu.nirvana> On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 03:41:57PM +0200, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote: > So why have this discussion *now* and not when thl and ville were > working on it ? You might just as well ask why I didn't do any fedora extras between spring 2003 and 2005. I think you as well as Thorsten and Ville had been around at that time, so you will probably know, and for those that don't I don't want to start ranting - there is nothing to gain, it's better to keep on constructive optimism ;) -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Wed Apr 26 14:27:54 2006 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 19:57:54 +0530 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <20060426142256.GL17533@neu.nirvana> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> <1146058917.2555.37.camel@otto.amantes> <20060426142256.GL17533@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1146061674.11383.60.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 16:22 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 03:41:57PM +0200, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote: > > So why have this discussion *now* and not when thl and ville were > > working on it ? > > You might just as well ask why I didn't do any fedora extras between > spring 2003 and 2005. I think you as well as Thorsten and Ville had > been around at that time, so you will probably know, and for those > that don't I don't want to start ranting - there is nothing to gain, > it's better to keep on constructive optimism ;) I am interested in that rant then. It would help since we ( Project Board) are trying to figure out better the policies on Fedora Extras and Core as repositories and it helps to understand what has changed. Rahul From wtogami at redhat.com Wed Apr 26 14:28:10 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 10:28:10 -0400 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <444F837A.50808@redhat.com> Axel Thimm wrote: > Hi, > > where is the right place to discuss kernel modules, this list? Yes here. > > The dilemma is, that the methology used at ATrpms differs in some > fundamental design parts from what is the current proposal, mostly the > one spec/src.rpm for both userland and kmdl builds and simple > unprepared upstream Sources:, and further derived concept > bits. This is not a "current proposal". Over the course of literally YEARS Extras has discussed the standard. Earlier this year Red Hat has officially ratified this as the kernel module standard for Core, Extras, and RHEL5+. > > ATrpms' concept also supports RHEL3 and earlier FCs and even RHL > releases (e.g. not dependending on availability of kernel-devel which > doesn't exist for these distributions). > > So my options are > > o convince people about adopting ATrpms' methology > good: field-proven, easy maintenance, many users already accustomed > to kmdls, works on RHEL3 and legacy, too > bad: Thorsten has put a lot of work in the current proposal, > different buildsystem adaption, danger of endless discussions > > o fork packages (RHEL3 and legacy in ATrpms, other here) > good: all the bad above reversed > bad: double maintain them > > o do nothing > good: no work ;) > bad: no packages :/ > > Maybe a compromise may look like > > o Allow ATrpms' methology to enter the system > o Allow kmdls to get submitted/reviewed > o Modify the methology w/o breaking RHEL3/legacy stuff and w/o > breaking the user's interfacing (but potentially break the > packagers' interface if a better macro system is developed) > Fedora packages are generally against keeping compatibility across many distributions. The exception to this is if compatibility can be achieved without making the spec look incredibly messy. In all other cases forking the package is exactly what is expected. That being said, if you can point out ways in which to improve the current ratified standard, please start a discussion about specific things that can be improved about it. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From tla-ml at rasmil.dk Wed Apr 26 13:11:02 2006 From: tla-ml at rasmil.dk (Tim Lauridsen) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 15:11:02 +0200 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <444F7166.3080509@rasmil.dk> Axel Thimm wrote: > Hi, > > where is the right place to discuss kernel modules, this list? > > I know most people are weared out on the subject, and probably don't > want to hear about it anymore. Still, ATrpms has a bunchful of useful > kernel modules that would fit in very well. > > The dilemma is, that the methology used at ATrpms differs in some > fundamental design parts from what is the current proposal, mostly the > one spec/src.rpm for both userland and kmdl builds and simple > unprepared upstream Sources:, and further derived concept > bits. > > ATrpms' concept also supports RHEL3 and earlier FCs and even RHL > releases (e.g. not dependending on availability of kernel-devel which > doesn't exist for these distributions). > > So my options are > > o convince people about adopting ATrpms' methology > good: field-proven, easy maintenance, many users already accustomed > to kmdls, works on RHEL3 and legacy, too > bad: Thorsten has put a lot of work in the current proposal, > different buildsystem adaption, danger of endless discussions > > o fork packages (RHEL3 and legacy in ATrpms, other here) > good: all the bad above reversed > bad: double maintain them > > o do nothing > good: no work ;) > bad: no packages :/ > > Maybe a compromise may look like > > o Allow ATrpms' methology to enter the system > o Allow kmdls to get submitted/reviewed > o Modify the methology w/o breaking RHEL3/legacy stuff and w/o > breaking the user's interfacing (but potentially break the > packagers' interface if a better macro system is developed) > > e.g. if the basic properties of the kmdl system are acceptable (mostly > the one src.rpm with upstream sources for all builds), then let's get > it into the system to start improving it. > I not a kernel module packager, so i can't comment on the methology, but from a user perspective the most important feature is automatic updating of kernel-modules when new versions of the kernel is installed by yum, this is working great with the madwifi,ntfs,nvidia drivers in the livna fc5 repository. if kmdls can be used in the same way, then fine with me for a users perspective. There have been a lot of FUD about ATrpms, lets forget about that and make some packages for people. Keep up the good work Axel. Tim From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Wed Apr 26 14:55:24 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:55:24 +0200 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <444F7166.3080509@rasmil.dk> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> <444F7166.3080509@rasmil.dk> Message-ID: <20060426145524.GA8659@neu.nirvana> On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 03:11:02PM +0200, Tim Lauridsen wrote: > Axel Thimm wrote: > I not a kernel module packager, so i can't comment on the methology, but > from a user perspective the most important feature is automatic updating > of kernel-modules when new versions of the kernel is installed by yum, > this is working great with the madwifi,ntfs,nvidia drivers in the livna > fc5 repository. if kmdls can be used in the same way, then fine with me > for a users perspective. There is a general issue with kernel modules and upgrading, not only affecting the way ATrpms does it, but far more general. In a nutshell you have a two-dimensional versioning which cannot be put into an mathematically ordered relationship, no matter what you try (in fact it can be proven mathematically for |Rx|R ;) So for rpm's sake you need to neutralize one versioning and that leads to the ugly-uname-r-in-package-name, or you break certain scenarios. That OTOH makes yum/smart/apt properly upgrade within the kernel (e.g. new kernel module for the same kernel), but not across kernels. apt does have some special support to do that and yum and smart could be taught, too. > There have been a lot of FUD about ATrpms, lets forget about that and > make some packages for people. Keep up the good work Axel. Thanks! -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Wed Apr 26 15:00:45 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 17:00:45 +0200 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <1146061674.11383.60.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> <1146058917.2555.37.camel@otto.amantes> <20060426142256.GL17533@neu.nirvana> <1146061674.11383.60.camel@sundaram.pnq.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060426150045.GB8659@neu.nirvana> On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 07:57:54PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 16:22 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 03:41:57PM +0200, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote: > > > So why have this discussion *now* and not when thl and ville were > > > working on it ? > > > > You might just as well ask why I didn't do any fedora extras between > > spring 2003 and 2005. I think you as well as Thorsten and Ville had > > been around at that time, so you will probably know, and for those > > that don't I don't want to start ranting - there is nothing to gain, > > it's better to keep on constructive optimism ;) > > I am interested in that rant then. It would help since we ( Project > Board) are trying to figure out better the policies on Fedora Extras and > Core as repositories and it helps to understand what has changed. I don't feel that burring out old fedora history and blaming this and that will help. It will probably only stir up some arguments again and generate another dichotomy. The current picture of fedora core/extras/legacy/etc. is a far more healthier than it was, when I stepped away (at least from my personal POV) and that's what really matters. If you are still interested I'd take that off-list. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From katzj at redhat.com Wed Apr 26 15:15:03 2006 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 11:15:03 -0400 Subject: Getting pkgconfig to always point to /usr/lib/pkgconfig In-Reply-To: <1146050250.23639.30.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> References: <1146049528.23639.28.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <444F55FA.4060004@volny.cz> <1146050250.23639.30.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: <1146064503.16554.36.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 12:17 +0100, PFJ wrote: > > > I know that I can %define _libdir to point to /usr/lib easily enough > > > irrespective of the platform, but is there a way to do this with > > > pkgconfig (i.e. always go to /usr/lib/pkgconfig)? > > You can use /usr/share/pkgconfig for arch-independent .pc files. > > Will that be picked up though if your configure script needs that > package? By default, pkgconfig searches $libdir/pkgconfig and $datadir/pkgconfig for .pc files Jeremy From triad at df.lth.se Wed Apr 26 15:18:27 2006 From: triad at df.lth.se (Linus Walleij) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 17:18:27 +0200 (CEST) Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <444F837A.50808@redhat.com> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> <444F837A.50808@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 26 Apr 2006, Warren Togami wrote: > Fedora packages are generally against keeping compatibility across many > distributions. The exception to this is if compatibility can be achieved > without making the spec look incredibly messy. In all other cases forking > the package is exactly what is expected. This is also the lesson I learned from my reviewers. Write the spec for one single FC release, keep it alive as long as that release lives and then just drop it and move on to the living ones. I used to try to write specs that would be for all distributions ("all" as in Fedora, Mandriva, Yellow Dog...) was told I was doing something stupid, then at one time tried to write for all distributions (as in FC1, FC2, FC3, ...) and was dismissed again. So from a social law as to how people react on your actions follows that this is simply not the Fedora way. (Like I was thinking as a programmer trying to address all corner cases.) However it would be good to have this as an official policy so everyone get it at an early stage. Warren? Linus From kevin.kofler at chello.at Wed Apr 26 16:05:53 2006 From: kevin.kofler at chello.at (Kevin Kofler) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:05:53 +0000 (UTC) Subject: package EOL References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: Paul writes: > You can't. I know of quite a few packages that are stable. z88dk and > fuse-emulator are stable and it's been a while since the main branches > have been updated. Neither though are inactive. While that assessment is true for z88dk targets which are essentially historical machines, such as the Spectrum and the Z88, the situation is pretty different for those targets which still get hardware and OS upgrades. For example, the TI-82 target still doesn't support the ROM 19.006 and there seems to be no work whatsoever done towards supporting it. And while the TI-83+ target _probably_ still works for the TI-84+ and 84+SE, this is more by accident than because of any work done towards it. Kevin Kofler PS (OT): The translation of the quote in your sig to German totally ruins the joke... M$ Window$ isn't called "Fenster" around here. From kevin.kofler at chello.at Wed Apr 26 16:15:56 2006 From: kevin.kofler at chello.at (Kevin Kofler) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:15:56 +0000 (UTC) Subject: package EOL References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: Paul writes: > Sure it's fun, but is it worth it - especially if the upstream > maintainer has dropped the package? And how do you stop the packager from simply setting up a web page at any free webspace provider or a project page at SourceForge, Savannah or wherever, posting updates there and declaring this the new upstream? (Upstream also being the packager has always been allowed, but even if you disallow it, how do you stop the packager for using a fake name for the "upstream"?) If someone cares enough about the package to get it packaged into Extras, setting up a new "upstream" is not a significant hurdle, having to do it is just going to annoy the packager for no good reason. What matters is that someone is willing to keep the package updated, whether it is officially the "upstream" or the "packager" doesn't really change anything. (I also think willingness to keep the package up to date is more important than development activity. If there's lots of development, but all done on RHL 4.0, that's not going to make it easier to package for devel.) Kevin Kofler From kevin.kofler at chello.at Wed Apr 26 16:24:48 2006 From: kevin.kofler at chello.at (Kevin Kofler) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:24:48 +0000 (UTC) Subject: package EOL References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: Michael Schwendt writes: > So far, policies about orphans have been lax or non-existent as to give > potential contributors the opportunity to evaluate orphans and pick them > up more easily. However, I think the time has come to delete orphans from > the repository more regularly and in accordance with a well-defined > policy. Else the list of orphans will grow as we continue in "devel" and > old orphans exist only in the old branches. I'm a proponent of the > all-or-nothing strategy: orphaned binaries are deleted from all active > (i.e. still supported branches). Once a new maintainer is found, he > could update and publish new builds. I don't see how deleting the packages is helpful from a user point of view. >From what I've noticed when this was done at FC5 release time, it does give an incentive for people who need the packages to maintain them, but it also introduces holes in the availability of packages which aren't needed (especially if you delete a package such as cgoban which had just been rebuilt for FC5 and where the rebuilder offered to take up maintainance - there was some lack of communication in that particular case, it has been taken up and rebuilt again since, but it was unavailable for a few days for no good reason). If the package still works and doesn't have known security holes, it doesn't absolutely require an update, so having nobody to do such an update isn't critical in that situation. (It's bad if there's upstream updates available and not pushed to Extras, but IMHO not critical enough to warrant deleting the package.) Just my 2 cents, Kevin Kofler From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 26 17:26:28 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 19:26:28 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060426192628.fe403525.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:24:48 +0000 (UTC), Kevin Kofler wrote: > I don't see how deleting the packages is helpful from a user point of view. 1) A sane upgrade path for all users who have not installed the package before: Don't offer packages for which there is no upgrade path. 2) Preventing that FE becomes a dumping ground for unmaintained packages, where no package owner is reachable via email or bugzilla. Our users submit bug reports, the tickets are assigned to extras-orphan@, and after X weeks somebody must close them as CANTFIX or WONTFIX and inform the users that we offered something, which has no maintainer or which is not available for the current releases of FC because it is broken and orphaned. > From what I've noticed when this was done at FC5 release time, it does give an > incentive for people who need the packages to maintain them, but it also > introduces holes in the availability of packages which aren't needed > (especially if you delete a package such as cgoban which had just been rebuilt > for FC5 and where the rebuilder offered to take up maintainance - there was > some lack of communication in that particular case, it has been taken up and > rebuilt again since, but it was unavailable for a few days for no good reason). So, you've found a single package which was rebuilt prior to updating owners.list or the OrphanedPackages page in the Wiki? Rule of thumb for next time: First take ownership in owners.list, then rebuild. Problem solved. ;) From grinnz at gmail.com Wed Apr 26 17:30:54 2006 From: grinnz at gmail.com (Dan) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 13:30:54 -0400 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <20060426145524.GA8659@neu.nirvana> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> <444F7166.3080509@rasmil.dk> <20060426145524.GA8659@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <444FAE4E.7060305@gmail.com> Axel Thimm wrote: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 03:11:02PM +0200, Tim Lauridsen wrote: > >> Axel Thimm wrote: >> I not a kernel module packager, so i can't comment on the methology, but >> from a user perspective the most important feature is automatic updating >> of kernel-modules when new versions of the kernel is installed by yum, >> this is working great with the madwifi,ntfs,nvidia drivers in the livna >> fc5 repository. if kmdls can be used in the same way, then fine with me >> for a users perspective. >> > > There is a general issue with kernel modules and upgrading, not only > affecting the way ATrpms does it, but far more general. In a nutshell > you have a two-dimensional versioning which cannot be put into an > mathematically ordered relationship, no matter what you try (in fact > it can be proven mathematically for |Rx|R ;) > > So for rpm's sake you need to neutralize one versioning and that leads > to the ugly-uname-r-in-package-name, or you break certain scenarios. > > That OTOH makes yum/smart/apt properly upgrade within the kernel > (e.g. new kernel module for the same kernel), but not across > kernels. apt does have some special support to do that and yum and > smart could be taught, too. > Livna used to have the uname-r-in-package-name scenario, which worked well because a kernel module for 2 different kernels was seen by yum as two different packages, and this is desired functionality. They changed now so that the package name is simply "kmod-ntfs" or similar, and thus yum is now updating it when you get one for a new kernel, leaving the old kernel without a module :(. I agree, if yum and smart were improved to handle the two-dimensional versioning, that would make everything much simpler. [snip] -Dan From jonathan.underwood at gmail.com Wed Apr 26 17:30:54 2006 From: jonathan.underwood at gmail.com (Jonathan Underwood) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 18:30:54 +0100 Subject: How to remove a module from bugzilla for FE? Message-ID: <645d17210604261030t29d4302euf1dd9387dccd4c2f@mail.gmail.com> Hi, I entered a wrong package name in the owners.list file. I've since corrected the package name in owners.list and recommited the file, but now both the old and the new names are appearing in bugzilla - what's the process for removing the incorrect name (emacs-muse) ? Thanks, Jonathan From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Wed Apr 26 17:36:51 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 19:36:51 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1146073019.8655.12.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le mercredi 26 avril 2006 ? 16:24 +0000, Kevin Kofler a ?crit : > I don't see how deleting the packages is helpful from a user point of view. Deleting orphans (and for that matter compat packages) is very helpful for users. It's *very* annoying and time consuming to build a system (technical or social) around packages which are no longer maintained and will disappear at the worst possible time (for you). One of the *big* advantages of using RHL/FC over Debian has historically been @rh maintainers spent some time carefully selecting best-of-breed apps to package instead of packaging everything under the sun and letting most of it bitrot. If the repository is not to be aggressively pruned (at least in devel, keeping stuff in existing releases is something else) I'd really love if all the convenient-but-really-dangerous-to-use-long-term stuff was moved to a separate repo from FE proper (Fedora Extra Purgatory or whatever). It is really not up to FE usual standards and if we're not careful it will poison the core repo reputation among users (just like other repos still bear the stigmatas of the poor choices they may have done at a time, even if they have long since mended their ways) Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e URL: From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Apr 26 17:39:29 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 19:39:29 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <20060426000411.GD2364@free.fr> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> <444EA05F.10306@knox.net.nz> <20060425224642.GB2364@free.fr> <444EA9F7.6060803@knox.net.nz> <20060425230711.GC2364@free.fr> <444EB247.1080104@knox.net.nz> <20060426000411.GD2364@free.fr> Message-ID: <20060426193929.fc26ef83.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 02:04:11 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > Now another question is what to do with existing packages for unmaintained > version. Should the built rpms be removed from the repo? This is an > interesting question but that question seems to me to be unrelated to the > other questions. I believe they shouldn't be removed from the repo, but > that's just my personal opinion. This question is not interesting. You don't want to shut down an old repository gradually and keep only packages, which are promised to be maintained by somebody. The question for a package in an old repository is not about "in or out", it's about "all or nothing". Either all packages are still maintained in case maintenance is needed, or it is announced that the entire repository enters a state of reduced expectations with regard to the overall maintenance. And in case you argue that there are no guarantees, no promises for the active repositories, well, then it's even _less than that_ for the older repositories. From wtogami at redhat.com Wed Apr 26 17:50:36 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 13:50:36 -0400 Subject: How to remove a module from bugzilla for FE? In-Reply-To: <645d17210604261030t29d4302euf1dd9387dccd4c2f@mail.gmail.com> References: <645d17210604261030t29d4302euf1dd9387dccd4c2f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <444FB2EC.6090702@redhat.com> Jonathan Underwood wrote: > Hi, > > I entered a wrong package name in the owners.list file. I've since > corrected the package name in owners.list and recommited the file, but > now both the old and the new names are appearing in bugzilla - what's > the process for removing the incorrect name (emacs-muse) ? > > Thanks, > Jonathan > Done. Warren From katzj at redhat.com Wed Apr 26 18:12:04 2006 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:12:04 -0400 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <444FAE4E.7060305@gmail.com> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> <444F7166.3080509@rasmil.dk> <20060426145524.GA8659@neu.nirvana> <444FAE4E.7060305@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1146075124.16554.82.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 13:30 -0400, Dan wrote: > Livna used to have the uname-r-in-package-name scenario, which worked > well because a kernel module for 2 different kernels was seen by yum as > two different packages, and this is desired functionality. They changed > now so that the package name is simply "kmod-ntfs" or similar, and thus > yum is now updating it when you get one for a new kernel, leaving the > old kernel without a module :(. I agree, if yum and smart were improved > to handle the two-dimensional versioning, that would make everything > much simpler. yum should be doing the right thing here as long as the kernel module package Provides: kernel-modules like it's supposed to... Jeremy From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Wed Apr 26 18:34:31 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 20:34:31 +0200 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <444F837A.50808@redhat.com> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> <444F837A.50808@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20060426183431.GC15305@neu.nirvana> On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 10:28:10AM -0400, Warren Togami wrote: > >The dilemma is, that the methology used at ATrpms differs in some > >fundamental design parts from what is the current proposal, mostly > >the one spec/src.rpm for both userland and kmdl builds and simple > >unprepared upstream Sources:, and further derived concept bits. > > This is not a "current proposal". Over the course of literally > YEARS Extras has discussed the standard. Earlier this year Red Hat > has officially ratified this as the kernel module standard for Core, > Extras, and RHEL5+. But over these years, the standard changed in non-adiabatic ways, it's more like several standards succeeding each other. So if there is "another standard" that fullfils all needs and maybe more why outrule it? > Fedora packages are generally against keeping compatibility across > many distributions. That probably sounds stronger than you mean it, almost looks like you're saying fedora's intention is to not keep compatibility ;) > That being said, if you can point out ways in which to improve the > current ratified standard, please start a discussion about specific > things that can be improved about it. That's what I did. And the most specific part is (unfortunately) the top level design of o several src.rpms per project and o removing the uname-r info. IIRC (perhaps from private communication) even thl was unhappy with both and these somehow were forced onto him. If you rework these then many other bits need redoing, it's another standard again. And if that's the way to go, why not pick a standard that is known to work and be rather mainenance free (otherwise how would I supply 10 (!) distributions with several archs and kernel flavours out of the same specfiles with automated kmdl builds for new kernels within a day). -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jonathan.underwood at gmail.com Wed Apr 26 19:18:10 2006 From: jonathan.underwood at gmail.com (Jonathan Underwood) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 20:18:10 +0100 Subject: How to remove a module from bugzilla for FE? In-Reply-To: <444FB2EC.6090702@redhat.com> References: <645d17210604261030t29d4302euf1dd9387dccd4c2f@mail.gmail.com> <444FB2EC.6090702@redhat.com> Message-ID: <645d17210604261218w4a0f8615kfd275d699ab64712@mail.gmail.com> On 26/04/06, Warren Togami wrote: > > Done. > > Warren Thanks very much. I was assuming that was something I could do, but I guess not. J From ville.skytta at iki.fi Wed Apr 26 20:05:02 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 23:05:02 +0300 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <1146075124.16554.82.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> <444F7166.3080509@rasmil.dk> <20060426145524.GA8659@neu.nirvana> <444FAE4E.7060305@gmail.com> <1146075124.16554.82.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1146081902.4846.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 14:12 -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote: > yum should be doing the right thing here as long as the kernel module > package Provides: kernel-modules like it's supposed to... Okay, so we've had a miscommunication or a missed detail in the module packaging standard/kmodtool reviews. kmodtool emits "kernel-module = ${verrel}${variant}" at the moment (note kernel-module, not kernel-modules). So if the plural form is "correct", kmodtool needs fixups. Please confirm that it is the intention and I'll look into fixing stuff. From katzj at redhat.com Wed Apr 26 20:10:18 2006 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:10:18 -0400 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <1146081902.4846.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> <444F7166.3080509@rasmil.dk> <20060426145524.GA8659@neu.nirvana> <444FAE4E.7060305@gmail.com> <1146075124.16554.82.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> <1146081902.4846.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1146082219.16554.85.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 23:05 +0300, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 14:12 -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote: > > yum should be doing the right thing here as long as the kernel module > > package Provides: kernel-modules like it's supposed to... > > Okay, so we've had a miscommunication or a missed detail in the module > packaging standard/kmodtool reviews. /me goes to double check the yum source > kmodtool emits "kernel-module = ${verrel}${variant}" at the moment (note > kernel-module, not kernel-modules). So if the plural form is "correct", > kmodtool needs fixups. Please confirm that it is the intention and I'll > look into fixing stuff. Yeah, it should have been the plural form. Apologies, I probably should have noticed this sooner Jeremy From ville.skytta at iki.fi Wed Apr 26 20:19:49 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 23:19:49 +0300 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <20060426183431.GC15305@neu.nirvana> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> <444F837A.50808@redhat.com> <20060426183431.GC15305@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1146082789.4846.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 20:34 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > o removing the uname-r info. It has not been removed, it's available at least in the form "Provides: kernel-module = $uname_r" (which will probably be renamed to kernel-modules, see elsewhere in this thread). Additional Provides can be added if needed, too. From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Wed Apr 26 20:51:46 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 22:51:46 +0200 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <1146082789.4846.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> <444F837A.50808@redhat.com> <20060426183431.GC15305@neu.nirvana> <1146082789.4846.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060426205146.GF15305@neu.nirvana> On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 11:19:49PM +0300, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 20:34 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > o removing the uname-r info. > > It has not been removed, it's available at least in the form "Provides: > kernel-module = $uname_r" (which will probably be renamed to > kernel-modules, see elsewhere in this thread). Additional Provides can > be added if needed, too. I was referring to removing it from the name and merging it into the release tag. The schemes w/o uname-r in the name have been shown to be broken some years back. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ville.skytta at iki.fi Wed Apr 26 21:11:39 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 00:11:39 +0300 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <20060426205146.GF15305@neu.nirvana> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> <444F837A.50808@redhat.com> <20060426183431.GC15305@neu.nirvana> <1146082789.4846.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060426205146.GF15305@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1146085899.4846.68.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 22:51 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > The schemes w/o uname-r in the name have been shown to be > broken some years back. The same can be said of the uname-r in package name scheme. This is a matter of picking poisons, and depsolvers need special case adaptations to work sufficiently well with both of the approaches. From pertusus at free.fr Wed Apr 26 21:58:00 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 23:58:00 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <1146073019.8655.12.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146073019.8655.12.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20060426215759.GA5454@free.fr> > If the repository is not to be aggressively pruned (at least in devel, > keeping stuff in existing releases is something else) I'd really love if > all the convenient-but-really-dangerous-to-use-long-term stuff was moved What is your definition for a convenient-but-really-dangerous-to-use-long-term package? I don't see any other than 'no packager is willing to maintain it'. But it seems that you have another definition... I agree that orphaned packages without dependencies should be removed from devel, however. -- Pat From pertusus at free.fr Wed Apr 26 22:22:29 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 00:22:29 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <20060426193929.fc26ef83.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> <444EA05F.10306@knox.net.nz> <20060425224642.GB2364@free.fr> <444EA9F7.6060803@knox.net.nz> <20060425230711.GC2364@free.fr> <444EB247.1080104@knox.net.nz> <20060426000411.GD2364@free.fr> <20060426193929.fc26ef83.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060426222229.GB5454@free.fr> > The question for a package in an old repository is not about "in or out", > it's about "all or nothing". Either all packages are still maintained in > case maintenance is needed, or it is announced that the entire repository > enters a state of reduced expectations with regard to the overall > maintenance. And in case you argue that there are no guarantees, no > promises for the active repositories, well, then it's even _less than that_ > for the older repositories. Less than nothing is nothing. As long as there is no guarantees and no promises for the active repositories I think that it doesn't make sense to say that it is different for older repos. And I don't think that the fedora extras people should make guarantees and promises, but build up infrastructures and institutions that allows to keep a high level of quality. In the end it will be up to the maintainers anyway. This is still the issue of group maintainership, bug responsivness (including forced/auto orphaning, forced co-maintainership), but I still think that it has nothing to do with different promises we should do for different repositories: no promise anywhere is the best in my opinion, anything else isn't realistic and put unneeded constraints on packagers and users (but I am beginning to repeat myself...). -- Pat From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Wed Apr 26 22:34:24 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 00:34:24 +0200 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <1146085899.4846.68.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> <444F837A.50808@redhat.com> <20060426183431.GC15305@neu.nirvana> <1146082789.4846.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060426205146.GF15305@neu.nirvana> <1146085899.4846.68.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060426223424.GA25506@neu.nirvana> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 12:11:39AM +0300, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 22:51 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > The schemes w/o uname-r in the name have been shown to be > > broken some years back. > > The same can be said of the uname-r in package name scheme. No, when I say broken I mean broken as in o removes still required kernel modules o overwrites kernel modules o doesn't allow multiple kernel modules (per kernel) > This is a matter of picking poisons, and depsolvers need special > case adaptations to work sufficiently well with both of the > approaches. The uname-r approach will never remove or overwrite modules. It will keep a kernel rpm happy throughout its lifetime. The only special handling that it requires is installs on kernel upgrades which can be done in a shell one-liner, so depsolver mods should be trivial, too, if needed at all. And w/o the uname-r approach there is simply no way a depsolver can handle it, no matter how much special logic you will try to add to it. You'll end up with further restrictions to accomodate it like "kmdls only for the very latest kernel" or similar. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Apr 26 23:19:31 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 19:19:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604262319.k3QNJVMK027901@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: trac https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174546 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com CC|fedora-package- | |review at redhat.com | CC| |fedora-extras- | |list at redhat.com joshuadfranklin at yahoo.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |joshuadfranklin at yahoo.com ------- Additional Comments From joshuadfranklin at yahoo.com 2006-04-26 19:19 EST ------- Could you add a directory to store the project in the RPM during the next bump? The trac wiki you reference suggests /var/trac and that it probably needs to be owned by apache. Not everyone wants to store their project in /tmp. :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From mpeters at mac.com Wed Apr 26 23:51:01 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:51:01 -0700 Subject: ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls) In-Reply-To: <444F7166.3080509@rasmil.dk> References: <20060426094849.GG17533@neu.nirvana> <444F7166.3080509@rasmil.dk> Message-ID: <1146095462.2341.5.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 15:11 +0200, Tim Lauridsen wrote: > > I not a kernel module packager, so i can't comment on the methology, but > from a user perspective the most important feature is automatic updating > of kernel-modules when new versions of the kernel is installed by yum, > this is working great with the madwifi,ntfs,nvidia drivers in the livna > fc5 repository. if kmdls can be used in the same way, then fine with me > for a users perspective. I would say it works well, not great. Last kernel update - it found and installed the new madwifi driver for me, but it removed the old madwifi driver - even though the kernel it was for is still installed. It needs a yum plugin to not remove kernel modules for the running kernel when a new kernel module is installed. Also - my initial yum update found new kernel but livna had not released the new drivers yet (a few hours later they had). It would be nice if a yum plugin could tell yum to ignore the kernel if additional installed kernel modules are not yet available. The potential problem is if yum is run as a service, kernel gets updated but modules are not because they weren't available yet. The user reboots at some point, and now is running a kernel without modules he needs and has to reboot into the old kernel. From peter at thecodergeek.com Thu Apr 27 03:49:11 2006 From: peter at thecodergeek.com (Peter Gordon) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 20:49:11 -0700 Subject: owners owners.list,1.901,1.902 In-Reply-To: <200604270305.k3R35MDL006934@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200604270305.k3R35MDL006934@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1146109751.5989.11.camel@tuxhugger> On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 20:05 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > +Fedora Extras|contacs|Contacts addressbook|jkeating at redhat.com|extras-qa at fedoraproject.org| Slight typo there. The package name should be "contacts," not "contacs," right? :) -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 27 06:34:42 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 02:34:42 -0400 Subject: [Bug 174546] Review Request: trac In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604270634.k3R6YgDT008829@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: trac https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174546 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|fedora-extras- |fedora-package- |list at redhat.com |review at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-27 02:34 EST ------- FWIW, the default httpd.conf snippet in the package suggests /srv/trac and the tools default to /srv/svn for the subversion location, maybe the Wiki should be just changed to reflect those locations instead. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From seg at haxxed.com Thu Apr 27 07:22:44 2006 From: seg at haxxed.com (Callum Lerwick) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 02:22:44 -0500 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1145882019.27140.22.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> References: <200604241137.k3OBbcxx012109@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1145880078.2442.9.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1145882019.27140.22.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> Message-ID: <1146122565.7621.86.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 05:33 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote: > I would prefer the GPG signed method. > It seems like the best way to ensure that there isn't ballot stuffing > going on. Yes. The thing to realize is you don't *have* to check signatures right away. If we all vote with GPG signed emails, it can still serve as an audit trail should anyone want to check up on it later. Though I do agree a "Meritocracy, not democracy" philosophy. Having existing FESCo members appoint replacements is possibly a good way to do this. However there needs to be some kind of checks and balances. Perhaps the existing FESCo can nominate new members, and the community can confirm or veto. (Which still likely involves voting which makes me wonder if this would really be substantially different. Oh well.) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From michael at knox.net.nz Thu Apr 27 07:30:04 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 19:30:04 +1200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1146122565.7621.86.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <200604241137.k3OBbcxx012109@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1145880078.2442.9.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1145882019.27140.22.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> <1146122565.7621.86.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <445072FC.3030308@knox.net.nz> Callum Lerwick wrote: > On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 05:33 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote: >> I would prefer the GPG signed method. >> It seems like the best way to ensure that there isn't ballot stuffing >> going on. > > Yes. The thing to realize is you don't *have* to check signatures right > away. If we all vote with GPG signed emails, it can still serve as an > audit trail should anyone want to check up on it later. > > Though I do agree a "Meritocracy, not democracy" philosophy. Having > existing FESCo members appoint replacements is possibly a good way to do > this. However there needs to be some kind of checks and balances. > Perhaps the existing FESCo can nominate new members, and the community > can confirm or veto. (Which still likely involves voting which makes me > wonder if this would really be substantially different. Oh well.) > What if the votes where done from within the accounts web page ? Simple web form, easier to tally the results, only FE account holds can vote.. Michael From seg at haxxed.com Thu Apr 27 07:45:06 2006 From: seg at haxxed.com (Callum Lerwick) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 02:45:06 -0500 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> Message-ID: <1146123908.7621.104.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 12:48 +0200, Neil Thompson wrote: > I become less and less convinced every year that democracy works in the free > software world - you tend to end up with people who are so focussed on maintaining > their popularity that they can't make the hard decisions - either that or marketroids > who start impacting on the technical side of the project. Open source is not politics. Its software engineering. Its computer science. Its... science! And science has nothing to do with democracy. The truth, The Right Thing, is not a democracy. No amount of sitting around and voting is going to make 2+2=5 or make Windows not suck. There is a fundamental difference between an open source project and a nation. "Cyberspace" is effectively infinite. Physical space... isn't. One of the very cornerstones of open source is the ability to fork. However, forking a nation is next to impossible, as the overhead and resource contention is quite high. You'll have to swap out some other nations... The strongest open source projects tend to have a Benevolent Dictator for Life. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From fedora at leemhuis.info Thu Apr 27 08:02:58 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 10:02:58 +0200 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <444F9ACF.3050800@redhat.com> References: <444F9ACF.3050800@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Mittwoch, den 26.04.2006, 12:07 -0400 schrieb Warren Togami: > As of Monday April 26th, 2006, all package update mail will be going out > to the new list fedora-package-announce. I'm wondering if we should post a weekly "this new packages have entered Fedora Extras during the last week" to that list. "new" = packages that were not in Fedora Extras before; Maybe important updates to existing packages could also be mentioned (e.g. a update from foo-0.9-9 to foo-1.0-1 or from bar-2.1-7 to bar-3.0-1) Opinions? Anyone interested in doing that job? CU thl From seg at haxxed.com Thu Apr 27 08:11:34 2006 From: seg at haxxed.com (Callum Lerwick) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 03:11:34 -0500 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <200604252319.k3PNJsv5005452@mx3.redhat.com> References: <200604252319.k3PNJsv5005452@mx3.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1146125495.7621.107.camel@localhost.localdomain> I recommend research into voting methods. Wikipedia has enough information to bore you for days: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_system After slogging through them all, I determined approval voting is the best method, IMHO: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approval_voting -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From mpeters at mac.com Thu Apr 27 08:12:35 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 01:12:35 -0700 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1146123908.7621.104.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1146123908.7621.104.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1146125555.2199.15.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 02:45 -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote: > On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 12:48 +0200, Neil Thompson wrote: > > I become less and less convinced every year that democracy works in the free > > software world - you tend to end up with people who are so focussed on maintaining > > their popularity that they can't make the hard decisions - either that or marketroids > > who start impacting on the technical side of the project. > > Open source is not politics. Its software engineering. Its computer > science. Its... science! And science has nothing to do with democracy. > The truth, The Right Thing, is not a democracy. No amount of sitting > around and voting is going to make 2+2=5 or make Windows not suck. Well, if you have 1 sig dig - it is possible for 2+2=5 (large values of 2) ;) Pure democracy isn't necessarily the best thing even for nations - tyranny of the masses. I think a mixture is a good thing, some appointed members and some elected. From rc040203 at freenet.de Thu Apr 27 09:06:28 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 11:06:28 +0200 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1146123908.7621.104.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1146123908.7621.104.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1146128788.31774.34.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 02:45 -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote: > On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 12:48 +0200, Neil Thompson wrote: > > I become less and less convinced every year that democracy works in the free > > software world - you tend to end up with people who are so focussed on maintaining > > their popularity that they can't make the hard decisions - either that or marketroids > > who start impacting on the technical side of the project. > > Open source is not politics. Its software engineering. Its computer > science. Its... science! And science has nothing to do with democracy. Executing/performing a task has little to do with democracy, decision taking/finding and steering has. That's why most democratic systems apply "separation of powers". > There is a fundamental difference between an open source project and a > nation. "Cyberspace" is effectively infinite. Physical space... isn't. > One of the very cornerstones of open source is the ability to fork. > However, forking a nation is next to impossible, You're not German nor Korean? "Go over there" had been a common sentence, people being dissatisfied with West Germany's system were confronted with from right wingers, not too long ago. > The strongest open source projects tend to have a Benevolent Dictator > for Life. Any dictatorship can only work if a dictator has sufficient powers to pressurize "his people" or if he finds a sufficient number of opportunists to follow. Now guess, why many OpenSource project starve out or fork and why "dictatorships" work in "Commercial life". Ralf From rc040203 at freenet.de Thu Apr 27 09:08:04 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 11:08:04 +0200 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <444F9ACF.3050800@redhat.com> <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <1146128884.31774.36.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 10:02 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 26.04.2006, 12:07 -0400 schrieb Warren Togami: > > As of Monday April 26th, 2006, all package update mail will be going out > > to the new list fedora-package-announce. > Opinions? Too many lists, the step above is wrong. Ralf From fedora at leemhuis.info Thu Apr 27 09:34:24 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 11:34:24 +0200 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <1146128884.31774.36.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <444F9ACF.3050800@redhat.com> <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1146128884.31774.36.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1146130464.16095.31.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Donnerstag, den 27.04.2006, 11:08 +0200 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: > On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 10:02 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, den 26.04.2006, 12:07 -0400 schrieb Warren Togami: > > > As of Monday April 26th, 2006, all package update mail will be going out > > > to the new list fedora-package-announce. > > Opinions? > Too many lists, the step above is wrong. Ralf, trust me, I really appreciate your feedback -- but *please* stay on topic. We need to get work done. I ask for options on a new idea and that's what I'd like to discuss. Otherwise we might run into a endless and unfruitful discussion again (that's happens often and we have to live with it -- but your mail was IMHO way to off topic this time). If you have problems with the mailing list split please open a separate thread for it and don't hijack this one. Besides: The split is not Extras specific. If you have a problem with it complain to Warren, on fedora-devel and/or on fedora-list. tia CU thl From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Thu Apr 27 10:01:13 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:01:13 +0200 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <444F9ACF.3050800@redhat.com> <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <20060427100113.GH30652@neu.nirvana> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 10:02:58AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 26.04.2006, 12:07 -0400 schrieb Warren Togami: > > As of Monday April 26th, 2006, all package update mail will be going out > > to the new list fedora-package-announce. > > I'm wondering if we should post a weekly "this new packages have entered > Fedora Extras during the last week" to that list. That's a good idea. But why weekly and not when they enter the repo (e.g. daily)? > "new" = packages that were not in Fedora Extras before; Maybe important > updates to existing packages could also be mentioned (e.g. a update from > foo-0.9-9 to foo-1.0-1 or from bar-2.1-7 to bar-3.0-1) Well, important is always subjective. Better just list them all. Maybe in a consize format, e.g. a daily mail like the rawhide report (not one mail per package like fedora core reports). > Opinions? Anyone interested in doing that job? Should the buildsystem do that? E.g. whenever the repo is freshened create that list? -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Thu Apr 27 12:02:06 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:02:06 +0200 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 27 Apr 2006 10:02:58 +0200." <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <200604271202.k3RC26Jq008968@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> fedora at leemhuis.info said: > Opinions? New packages: yes. Updates: no. If the person was interested in the package, it's probably installed already and it'll be updated next time the person runs "yum update", so why bother ? Plus, there's no easy rule to know which updates are "important"... > Anyone interested in doing that job? Should be fairly easy to keep a week-old copy of owners.list, and see what changed every week. Or check the SRPMS in the repo. Should there be one mail for each of devel, FE-5, and FE-4 ? A combined mail ? I could whip up some perl to do it. What should be in there: - package name only ? - package name + summary ? - package name + description ? - package name + summary + description ? Cheers, Christian From gauret at free.fr Thu Apr 27 12:30:27 2006 From: gauret at free.fr (Aurelien Bompard) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:30:27 +0200 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) References: <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <200604271202.k3RC26Jq008968@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: >> Anyone interested in doing that job? > > Should be fairly easy to keep a week-old copy of owners.list, and see what > changed every week. Or check the SRPMS in the repo. Should there be one > mail > for each of devel, FE-5, and FE-4 ? A combined mail ? > > I could whip up some perl to do it. What should be in there: > - package name only ? > - package name + summary ? > - package name + description ? > - package name + summary + description ? How about having it create an RSS file, pretty much like repo-rss (in yum-utils) does ? repo-rss only works on repos, which (AFAICT) have no knowledge of what is new and what is updated, so I think we need a new tool, but a subscribable RSS feed would help get-hot-new-stuff style features. Then, the SIGs will ask you to have a separate feed by group in comps.xml... (I can already hear the Games SIG :) ) I'd like to help, unfortunately I know very little perl. Would you consider writing the tool in python ? Aur?lien -- http://aurelien.bompard.org ~~~~ Jabber : abompard at jabber.fr "Never trust a computer you can't throw out a window." -- Steve Wozniak From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Thu Apr 27 12:36:02 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 08:36:02 -0400 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: References: <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <200604271202.k3RC26Jq008968@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <1146141362.12671.33.camel@cutter> On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 14:30 +0200, Aurelien Bompard wrote: > Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > >> Anyone interested in doing that job? > > > > Should be fairly easy to keep a week-old copy of owners.list, and see what > > changed every week. Or check the SRPMS in the repo. Should there be one > > mail > > for each of devel, FE-5, and FE-4 ? A combined mail ? > > > > I could whip up some perl to do it. What should be in there: > > - package name only ? > > - package name + summary ? > > - package name + description ? > > - package name + summary + description ? > > How about having it create an RSS file, pretty much like repo-rss (in > yum-utils) does ? repo-rss only works on repos, which (AFAICT) have no > knowledge of what is new and what is updated, so I think we need a new > tool, but a subscribable RSS feed would help get-hot-new-stuff style > features. > build time is in there. That's a pretty good metric of 'newness' -sv From mpeters at mac.com Thu Apr 27 12:43:03 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 05:43:03 -0700 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <200604271202.k3RC26Jq008968@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200604271202.k3RC26Jq008968@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <1146141783.2456.19.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 14:02 +0200, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > > I could whip up some perl to do it. Or you could use bash with awk and sed and ... ;) > What should be in there: > - package name only ? > - package name + summary ? > - package name + description ? > - package name + summary + description ? As a user, package name + summary + description is what I prefer. From jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Apr 27 12:43:35 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 08:43:35 -0400 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1146123908.7621.104.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1146123908.7621.104.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <604aa7910604270543o67027ab9mb6b508d8b54e7d64@mail.gmail.com> On 4/27/06, Callum Lerwick wrote: > Open source is not politics. Its software engineering. Its computer > science. Its... science! Lies! Its weird science! -jef" (weird science) Something like a recipe Bits and pieces . . . . Bits and pieces . . . . --Oingo Boingo, accurately describing anything writing in perl "spaleta From gauret at free.fr Thu Apr 27 12:43:56 2006 From: gauret at free.fr (Aurelien Bompard) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:43:56 +0200 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) References: <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <200604271202.k3RC26Jq008968@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1146141362.12671.33.camel@cutter> Message-ID: seth vidal wrote: > build time is in there. > That's a pretty good metric of 'newness' But it doesn't tell you if it's a new package in Fedora Extras (and not an update of an existing package). My idea would be to diff the owners.list and to create a repodata folder with the usual info, but about new packages only. Then the other repodata-aware tools would be available, including repo-rss and repoview (which already does groups). And the only thing left to do is to write a mail sender script which uses the repodata. Actually, I'm feeling like writing it :) Have you already worked on it Christian ? Do you mind if I take the job ? Aur?lien -- http://aurelien.bompard.org ~~~~ Jabber : abompard at jabber.fr One of the universal rules of happiness is: "Always be wary of any helpful item that weighs less than its operating manual". From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Thu Apr 27 12:51:19 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:51:19 +0200 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:43:56 +0200." Message-ID: <200604271251.k3RCpJL2009683@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> gauret at free.fr said: > Actually, I'm feeling like writing it :) Have you already worked on it > Christian ? Not yet :) > Do you mind if I take the job ? Not at all. I like the RSS feed idea, but have no experience creating one... If you get stuck somewhere, I'll try to help. Cheers, Christian From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Thu Apr 27 12:55:23 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 08:55:23 -0400 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: References: <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <200604271202.k3RC26Jq008968@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1146141362.12671.33.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1146142523.12671.43.camel@cutter> On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 14:43 +0200, Aurelien Bompard wrote: > seth vidal wrote: > > build time is in there. > > That's a pretty good metric of 'newness' > > But it doesn't tell you if it's a new package in Fedora Extras (and not an > update of an existing package). > > My idea would be to diff the owners.list and to create a repodata folder > with the usual info, but about new packages only. Then the other > repodata-aware tools would be available, including repo-rss and repoview > (which already does groups). And the only thing left to do is to write a > mail sender script which uses the repodata. > > Actually, I'm feeling like writing it :) Have you already worked on it > Christian ? Do you mind if I take the job ? > You could just keep 2 copies of the repodata on any given day or from week to week and just take the new ones from that list. use the rss function in repo-rss in yum-utils to make it easier for you. -sv From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Thu Apr 27 13:32:44 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 15:32:44 +0200 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <1146139256.31774.68.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <444F9ACF.3050800@redhat.com> <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060427100113.GH30652@neu.nirvana> <1146139256.31774.68.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20060427133244.GK30652@neu.nirvana> Why a private message on this subject? On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 02:00:56PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 12:01 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 10:02:58AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > Am Mittwoch, den 26.04.2006, 12:07 -0400 schrieb Warren Togami: > > > > As of Monday April 26th, 2006, all package update mail will be going out > > > > to the new list fedora-package-announce. > > > > > > I'm wondering if we should post a weekly "this new packages have entered > > > Fedora Extras during the last week" to that list. > > > > That's a good idea. But why weekly and not when they enter the repo > > (e.g. daily)? > ROTFL. There's nothing funny, you can get off the floor now. > AFAICT, this exactly is what the situation had been sofar. Some almighty > God at FESCo has decided to waste his and our time on a new mailing > list. ;) No, you can't compare the build report with the rawhide reports. The build reports simply have a list of built packages, new and updated thrown in a one liner alike with no changelog or even summary whatsoever. It's of no use to me to see that there was a package called abracatabra built unless I'm the packager/reviewer. If a new package enters the system I (as a user) want to see what that package does w/o guessing from the name. And I want to be able to separate new from updates. For an update I'd like to know why it was updated, so the first lines of the changelog are nice to look at. I think the rawhide format is just what I'd like to see, and maybe the same scripts can be reused. That also in the spirit of core/extras convergence politics. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Thu Apr 27 13:36:08 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 15:36:08 +0200 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <20060427133244.GK30652@neu.nirvana> References: <444F9ACF.3050800@redhat.com> <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060427100113.GH30652@neu.nirvana> <1146139256.31774.68.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060427133244.GK30652@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <20060427133608.GM30652@neu.nirvana> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 03:32:44PM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > I think the rawhide format is just what I'd like to see, and maybe the > same scripts can be reused. That also in the spirit of core/extras > convergence politics. Maybe even a common setup, where core and extras are mentioned together? E.g. one-stop-shop and one-format? -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From katzj at redhat.com Thu Apr 27 14:26:39 2006 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 10:26:39 -0400 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <20060427133608.GM30652@neu.nirvana> References: <444F9ACF.3050800@redhat.com> <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060427100113.GH30652@neu.nirvana> <1146139256.31774.68.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060427133244.GK30652@neu.nirvana> <20060427133608.GM30652@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1146147999.12685.5.camel@orodruin.boston.redhat.com> On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 15:36 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 03:32:44PM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > I think the rawhide format is just what I'd like to see, and maybe the > > same scripts can be reused. That also in the spirit of core/extras > > convergence politics. > > Maybe even a common setup, where core and extras are mentioned > together? E.g. one-stop-shop and one-format? The main thing that would stop them from being done together is that the push schedules are entirely disjoint -- the rawhide tree is once a day completely automated, the Extras push is as many times a day as the signers want/need to push and requires a human presence Jeremy From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Thu Apr 27 14:41:52 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 10:41:52 -0400 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <20060427133244.GK30652@neu.nirvana> References: <444F9ACF.3050800@redhat.com> <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060427100113.GH30652@neu.nirvana> <1146139256.31774.68.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060427133244.GK30652@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1146148912.15614.13.camel@cutter> > > > > I'm wondering if we should post a weekly "this new packages have entered > > > > Fedora Extras during the last week" to that list. > > > > > > That's a good idea. But why weekly and not when they enter the repo > > > (e.g. daily)? > > ROTFL. > > There's nothing funny, you can get off the floor now. > It would take a little more time when the repos built (notably the package pushes take a while, now.) And I think collecting the 'these are new' into a nice weekly summary would be nice. Having said that there is nothing saying we couldn't do both :) A weekly summary of new pkgs AND new pkg's announced when they come out. It just takes some time for someone to focus on the scripts to do it. > It's of no use to me to see that there was a package called > abracatabra built unless I'm the packager/reviewer. If a new package > enters the system I (as a user) want to see what that package does w/o > guessing from the name. And I want to be able to separate new from > updates. For an update I'd like to know why it was updated, so the > first lines of the changelog are nice to look at. I guess I don't think doing it in mail is useful, really. I prefer rss feeds for this kind of information. And putting changelogs and other misc info in an rss feed makes more sense - at least to me. -sv From tibbs at math.uh.edu Thu Apr 27 14:42:23 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 09:42:23 -0500 Subject: Provides: and Obsoletes: to satisfy pre-extras package dependencies? Message-ID: Is there any issue with new extras packages containing Obsoletes: tags which facilitate upgrades from the pre-extras packages? What about Provides: tags to satisfy dependencies of packages which are not in Core/Extras? The specific example is par2cmdline: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190070 which has Obsoletes: parchive <= 1.1.4 Provides: parchive = 1.1.4.0.par2.%{version} - J< From bugs.michael at gmx.net Thu Apr 27 14:58:40 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:58:40 +0200 Subject: Provides: and Obsoletes: to satisfy pre-extras package dependencies? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060427165840.d65f5559.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 09:42:23 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > Is there any issue with new extras packages containing Obsoletes: tags > which facilitate upgrades from the pre-extras packages? What about > Provides: tags to satisfy dependencies of packages which are not in > Core/Extras? > > The specific example is par2cmdline: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190070 > > which has > > Obsoletes: parchive <= 1.1.4 > Provides: parchive = 1.1.4.0.par2.%{version} I posted to FESCO about these issues yesterday, since multiple packagers have been hit by this, and wanted to hear more comments. Ville pointed me to this bug report: https://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=532 There seems to be disagreement that it's a bug in Yum. From wart at kobold.org Thu Apr 27 15:17:45 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Wart) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 08:17:45 -0700 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: References: <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <200604271202.k3RC26Jq008968@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1146141362.12671.33.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <4450E099.7020904@kobold.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Aurelien Bompard wrote: > seth vidal wrote: > >>build time is in there. >>That's a pretty good metric of 'newness' > > > But it doesn't tell you if it's a new package in Fedora Extras (and not an > update of an existing package). > > My idea would be to diff the owners.list and to create a repodata folder > with the usual info, but about new packages only. Then the other > repodata-aware tools would be available, including repo-rss and repoview > (which already does groups). And the only thing left to do is to write a > mail sender script which uses the repodata. > > Actually, I'm feeling like writing it :) Have you already worked on it > Christian ? Do you mind if I take the job ? Just don't forget to have a separate feed by comps.xml groups for the Games SIG. We've got a handful of new packages in the pipeline... ;) - --Mike -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEUOCXDeYlPfs40g8RAre/AJ0a3mpVUL3DX5MvGH2Rmk2G/UXBaACfX821 ZuWbkyWdK6wKrOEPWjufmoY= =rXOq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Apr 27 15:35:21 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 11:35:21 -0400 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <1146148912.15614.13.camel@cutter> References: <444F9ACF.3050800@redhat.com> <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060427100113.GH30652@neu.nirvana> <1146139256.31774.68.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060427133244.GK30652@neu.nirvana> <1146148912.15614.13.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <604aa7910604270835j7f9b3cfub5ce758b6d3c8e58@mail.gmail.com> On 4/27/06, seth vidal wrote: > A weekly summary of new pkgs AND new pkg's announced when they come out. I think the weekly summaries are going to be particularly useful for the people in the community who attempt to write interesting-to-read status reports... like thomas chung's weekly news. A well defined weekly summary, in different consumable forms (rss and email and html and whatever else), will particularly help with any propaganda....err...outreach initiatives in a way that individual package annouce emails won't be. And of course individual annouce emails (rss feed,whatever) are handy for those of us so plugged in that we like reading things like daily freshmeat feed. -jef"Still hoping for an Elvish translation of FWN to hit the fedora feeds"spaleta From tibbs at math.uh.edu Thu Apr 27 15:49:34 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 10:49:34 -0500 Subject: Provides: and Obsoletes: to satisfy pre-extras package dependencies? In-Reply-To: <20060427165840.d65f5559.bugs.michael@gmx.net> (Michael Schwendt's message of "Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:58:40 +0200") References: <20060427165840.d65f5559.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: >>>>> "MS" == Michael Schwendt writes: MS> Ville pointed me to this bug report: MS> https://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=532 Interesting. So I take it that there's no prohibition against doing this kind of thing in Extras, but that everyone should be aware that it might not work as expected. Thanks, - J< From fedora at leemhuis.info Thu Apr 27 16:04:38 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:04:38 +0200 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <1146148912.15614.13.camel@cutter> References: <444F9ACF.3050800@redhat.com> <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060427100113.GH30652@neu.nirvana> <1146139256.31774.68.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060427133244.GK30652@neu.nirvana> <1146148912.15614.13.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1146153878.2849.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Donnerstag, den 27.04.2006, 10:41 -0400 schrieb seth vidal: > > It's of no use to me to see that there was a package called > > abracatabra built unless I'm the packager/reviewer. If a new package > > enters the system I (as a user) want to see what that package does w/o > > guessing from the name. And I want to be able to separate new from > > updates. For an update I'd like to know why it was updated, so the > > first lines of the changelog are nice to look at. > > I guess I don't think doing it in mail is useful, really. I prefer rss > feeds for this kind of information. And putting changelogs and other > misc info in an rss feed makes more sense - at least to me. Not for me -- I don't use rss feeds normally so they would create a extra hurdle for me. And mail a IMHO has a important benefit: It will always land in my Inbox -- I don't have to remember to look at the feed once a day. Maybe I'm a bit old fashioned in this context. But I'm probably not the only one. CU thl P.S.: I don't like Webforums for the same reasons -- mail from several mailing lists with different topics is always delivered to one place (my inbox) and I don't have to browse to X webforums (with Y different interfaces) daily to see what's new ("push vs. pull") -- Thorsten Leemhuis From skvidal at linux.duke.edu Thu Apr 27 16:12:34 2006 From: skvidal at linux.duke.edu (seth vidal) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:12:34 -0400 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <1146153878.2849.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <444F9ACF.3050800@redhat.com> <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060427100113.GH30652@neu.nirvana> <1146139256.31774.68.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060427133244.GK30652@neu.nirvana> <1146148912.15614.13.camel@cutter> <1146153878.2849.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1146154354.15614.51.camel@cutter> On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 18:04 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 27.04.2006, 10:41 -0400 schrieb seth vidal: > > > It's of no use to me to see that there was a package called > > > abracatabra built unless I'm the packager/reviewer. If a new package > > > enters the system I (as a user) want to see what that package does w/o > > > guessing from the name. And I want to be able to separate new from > > > updates. For an update I'd like to know why it was updated, so the > > > first lines of the changelog are nice to look at. > > > > I guess I don't think doing it in mail is useful, really. I prefer rss > > feeds for this kind of information. And putting changelogs and other > > misc info in an rss feed makes more sense - at least to me. > > Not for me -- I don't use rss feeds normally so they would create a > extra hurdle for me. And mail a IMHO has a important benefit: It will > always land in my Inbox -- I don't have to remember to look at the feed > once a day. > > Maybe I'm a bit old fashioned in this context. But I'm probably not the > only one. > > CU > thl > > P.S.: I don't like Webforums for the same reasons -- mail from several > mailing lists with different topics is always delivered to one place (my > inbox) and I don't have to browse to X webforums (with Y different > interfaces) daily to see what's new ("push vs. pull") I don't really disagree. But an rss feed has the ease of being able to be spit out into email automatically. Going from email->rss is harder but rss->email isn't hard at all. The virtue of known formats :) -sv From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Thu Apr 27 16:16:39 2006 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian.Iseli at licr.org) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:16:39 +0200 Subject: FE Package Status of Apr 27, 2006 Message-ID: <200604271616.k3RGGdQh012166@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Hi folks, Here is the next batch. I received a spot on the cvs/fedora repo to put the script that produces this output. You can see it here: http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/status-report-scripts/?root=fedora I have included Patrice's patch and there now is an additional section for packages dropped from core (quite a few, I didn't realize there were so many) There still is a potential clash between core and extras for 2 packages: - check - glib 50 new packages were approved during the past week: wow. The owners file was maintained properly sorted: good. I had a quick look at the FC-NEW blocker, and it's empty (except for a closed ticket that I'm not allowed to browse)... : not so good, I guess... Cheers, Christian --- FE Package Status of Apr 27, 2006 The full report can be found here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/PackageStatus Owners file stats: - 1654 packages - 58 orphans - 45 packages not available in extras devel or release Axel dot Thimm at ATrpms dot net synaptic andreas at bawue dot net dd_rescue andreas at bawue dot net metapixel cgoorah at yahoo dot com dot au kadischi davidhart at tqmcube dot com leafnode dennis at ausil dot us cryptplug dreadyman at gmail dot com yakuake fredrik at dolda2000 dot com icmpdn gauret at free dot fr elmo gemi at bluewin dot ch inti gemi at bluewin dot ch drscheme ghenry at suretecsystems dot com gnome-applet-netmon ghenry at suretecsystems dot com rsnapshot ivazquez at ivazquez dot net gnome-theme-clearlooks ivazquez at ivazquez dot net python-nose ivazquez at ivazquez dot net gpredict jeff at ultimateevil dot org up-imapproxy jkeating at redhat dot com contacts jonathan dot underwood at gmail dot com muse jvdias at redhat dot com webmin matthias at rpmforge dot net php-pecl-sqlite matthias at rpmforge dot net fillets-ng-data-cs matthias at rpmforge dot net php-mmcache michael at knox dot net dot nz gnome-themes-extras notting at redhat dot com perl-Finanace-Quote notting at redhat dot com comps oliver at linux-kernel dot at squidGuard qspencer at ieee dot org mftrace sgrubb at redhat dot com libsafe shahms at shahms dot com python-lxml tcallawa at redhat dot com R-RScaLAPACK tcallawa at redhat dot com libgdamm tcallawa at redhat dot com R-hdf5 tcallawa at redhat dot com stripesnoop tcallawa at redhat dot com lout tcallawa at redhat dot com pam_pkcs11 tcallawa at redhat dot com opendap toniw at iki dot fi silky toniw at iki dot fi libmatchbox ville dot skytta at iki dot fi lirc-kmod-common ville dot skytta at iki dot fi lirc-kmod wtogami at redhat dot com openoffice-extras wtogami at redhat dot com iiimf-le-simplehangul zipsonic at gmail dot com nx zipsonic at gmail dot com freenx - 1 packages not available in extras devel but present in release andreas at bawue dot net echoping - 3 packages which have not yet been FE-APPROVE'd... https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_id=187625 ices rjune at bravegnuworld.com https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_id=165689,184080 SquidGuard oliver at linux-kernel.at webmin jvdias at redhat.com - 3 packages present in the development repo which have no owners entry bcm43xx-fwcutter perl-Finance-Quote wxPythonGTK2 - 15 orphaned packages, yet available in extras devel duplicity gtkglarea2 ks3switch lrmi lua ots perl-Chart perl-Net-Netmask perl-XML-DOM perl-XML-RegExp perl-XML-XPath perl-XML-XQL s3switch tpb xosd - 36 packages that moved to core Packages appearing both in Core and Extras: - 1 packages duplicated for FC5: tcallawa at redhat dot com check - 2 packages duplicated for devel: rdieter at math dot unl dot edu glib tcallawa at redhat dot com check FE-ACCEPT packages stats: - 724 accepted, closed package reviews - 4 accepted, closed package reviews not in repo - 6 accepted, closed package reviews not in owners - 0 accepted, open package reviews older than 4 weeks; - 13 accepted, open package reviews with a package already in the repo FE-REVIEW packages stats: - 87 open tickets - 9 tickets with no activity in eight weeks - 4 tickets with no activity in four weeks - 1 closed tickets FE-NEW packages stats: - 174 open tickets - 4 tickets with no activity in eight weeks - 14 tickets with no activity in four weeks - 2 closed tickets FE-NEEDSPONSOR packages stats: - 32 open tickets - 1 tickets with no activity in eight weeks - 1 tickets with no activity in four weeks FE-LEGAL packages stats: - 1 open tickets OPEN-BUGS packages stats: - 211 open tickets - 73 tickets with no activity in eight weeks - 77 tickets with no activity in four weeks CVS stats: - 1630 packages with a devel directory - 7 packages with no owners entry bcm43xx-fwcutter initng kile-i18n pcb perl-Finance-Quote perl-Maypole raptor - 3 packages in CVS devel *and* Core check libevent glib Maintainers stats: - 180 maintainers - 2 inactive maintainers with open bugs Dropped FC packages: - 236 packages were dropped from core since FC 1 From fedora at leemhuis.info Thu Apr 27 16:20:37 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:20:37 +0200 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <1146154354.15614.51.camel@cutter> References: <444F9ACF.3050800@redhat.com> <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060427100113.GH30652@neu.nirvana> <1146139256.31774.68.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060427133244.GK30652@neu.nirvana> <1146148912.15614.13.camel@cutter> <1146153878.2849.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1146154354.15614.51.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1146154837.2849.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Donnerstag, den 27.04.2006, 12:12 -0400 schrieb seth vidal: > On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 18:04 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, den 27.04.2006, 10:41 -0400 schrieb seth vidal: > > > > It's of no use to me to see that there was a package called > > > > abracatabra built unless I'm the packager/reviewer. If a new package > > > > enters the system I (as a user) want to see what that package does w/o > > > > guessing from the name. And I want to be able to separate new from > > > > updates. For an update I'd like to know why it was updated, so the > > > > first lines of the changelog are nice to look at. > > > > > > I guess I don't think doing it in mail is useful, really. I prefer rss > > > feeds for this kind of information. And putting changelogs and other > > > misc info in an rss feed makes more sense - at least to me. > > > > Not for me -- I don't use rss feeds normally so they would create a > > extra hurdle for me. And mail a IMHO has a important benefit: It will > > always land in my Inbox -- I don't have to remember to look at the feed > > once a day. > > I don't really disagree. > > But an rss feed has the ease of being able to be spit out into email > automatically. Sure, that makes sense. CU thl -- Thorsten Leemhuis From rdieter at math.unl.edu Thu Apr 27 16:26:22 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 11:26:22 -0500 Subject: FE Package Status of Apr 27, 2006 In-Reply-To: <200604271616.k3RGGdQh012166@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200604271616.k3RGGdQh012166@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > Packages appearing both in Core and Extras: > - packages duplicated for devel: > rdieter at math dot unl dot edu glib I thought glib/gtk+ were (supposed to be) pulled out of Core? Has it just not happened yet (pending confirmed move to Extras)? -- Rex From paul at city-fan.org Thu Apr 27 16:38:16 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:38:16 +0100 Subject: rpms/proftpd/devel .cvsignore, 1.7, 1.8 proftpd.init, 1.4, 1.5 proftpd.spec, 1.13, 1.14 sources, 1.7, 1.8 In-Reply-To: <200604211705.k3LH5DTL001073@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> References: <200604211705.k3LH5DTL001073@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> Message-ID: <4450F378.6080403@city-fan.org> Matthias Saou (thias) wrote: > %configure \ > - --localstatedir="/var/run" \ > - --with-includes="%{_includedir}%{!?_without_tls:${OPENSSL_INC}}%{?_with_mysql::%{_includedir}/mysql}" \ > - %{?_with_ipv6:--enable-ipv6} \ > - %{?_with_mysql:--with-libraries="%{_libdir}/mysql"} \ > - %{?_with_postgresql:--with-libraries="%{_libdir}"} \ > - --with-modules=mod_readme:mod_auth_pam%{?_with_ldap::mod_ldap}%{?_with_mysql::mod_sql:mod_sql_mysql}%{?_with_postgresql::mod_sql:mod_sql_postgres}%{!?_without_tls::mod_tls} > + --libexecdir="%{_libexecdir}/proftpd" \ > + --localstatedir="%{_var}/run" \ > + --enable-ctrls \ > + --enable-facl \ > + --enable-dso \ --enable-dso adds this to the Makefile: MAIN_LDFLAGS=-L$(top_srcdir)/lib/libltdl -dlopen self -export-dynamic -rpath $(DESTDIR)$(sbindir) which results in this: rpmlint proftpd-1.3.0-1.fc6.i386.rpm E: proftpd binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/sbin/proftpd ['/var/tmp/proftpd-1.3.0-1.fc6-root/usr/sbin'] Should the $(DESTDIR) be removed here or is it worse than that? Paul. From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Thu Apr 27 16:55:01 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:55:01 +0200 Subject: FE Package Status of Apr 27, 2006 In-Reply-To: References: <200604271616.k3RGGdQh012166@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <20060427165501.GO30652@neu.nirvana> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 11:26:22AM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > > >Packages appearing both in Core and Extras: > > - packages duplicated for devel: > > rdieter at math dot unl dot edu glib > > I thought glib/gtk+ were (supposed to be) pulled out of Core? > Has it just not happened yet (pending confirmed move to Extras)? Would that require all gtk/gnome bits to move to extras, too? If that's the intention then maybe gtk/gnome stuff needs to migrate first and the libs last, otherwise you'll have core with broken dependencies. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From orion at cora.nwra.com Thu Apr 27 17:00:32 2006 From: orion at cora.nwra.com (Orion Poplawski) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 11:00:32 -0600 Subject: Taking ownership of perl-XML-DOM and requirements Message-ID: <4450F8B0.5000109@cora.nwra.com> I'll take ownership of: perl-XML-DOM perl-XML-RegExp If no one objects I'll change the owners.list file and update the wiki page next week. -- Orion Poplawski System Administrator 303-415-9701 x222 Colorado Research Associates/NWRA FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane, Boulder CO 80301 http://www.co-ra.com From bugzilla at drussell.dnsalias.com Thu Apr 27 17:02:25 2006 From: bugzilla at drussell.dnsalias.com (Don Russell) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 10:02:25 -0700 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <1146153878.2849.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <444F9ACF.3050800@redhat.com> <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060427100113.GH30652@neu.nirvana> <1146139256.31774.68.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060427133244.GK30652@neu.nirvana> <1146148912.15614.13.camel@cutter> <1146153878.2849.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4450F921.2040308@drussell.dnsalias.com> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 27.04.2006, 10:41 -0400 schrieb seth vidal: > >>> It's of no use to me to see that there was a package called >>> abracatabra built unless I'm the packager/reviewer. If a new package >>> enters the system I (as a user) want to see what that package does w/o >>> guessing from the name. And I want to be able to separate new from >>> updates. For an update I'd like to know why it was updated, so the >>> first lines of the changelog are nice to look at. >>> >> I guess I don't think doing it in mail is useful, really. I prefer rss >> feeds for this kind of information. And putting changelogs and other >> misc info in an rss feed makes more sense - at least to me. >> > > Not for me -- I don't use rss feeds normally so they would create a > extra hurdle for me. And mail a IMHO has a important benefit: It will > always land in my Inbox -- I don't have to remember to look at the feed > once a day. > > Maybe I'm a bit old fashioned in this context. But I'm probably not the > only one. > I agree with that.... I would like to see announcements of individual new packages as they become available (in extras or core, I really don't care). I'd like the announcements to come via e-mail and include a description of what the package is/does. It might be nice if such "initial public offerings" could include some information about *why* the package is being added and how it might compare to other similar packages.... or, perhaps a link to the bugzilla thread so those interested could read more about how the package came to be. If I think a new package fits my needs I will "yum install ..." it (or at least keep the announcement as a reminder to install it later), and from that point on, will get any updates via the nightly yum update. I really don't want to see a weekly summary of all that's new... Leave the weekly summary to the "weekly newsletter people"... :-) Package updates are sent via e-mail throughout the day... works great... I've never seen a summary e-mail of which packages were updated this week, why do that for new packages? New is just a special case of "updated".... treat it the same.... use *new* instead of *update* in the subject line: Fedora Core 5 new: open-sesame-0.5.0 Subsequent updates are then sent as: Fedora Core 5 update: open-sesame-0.5.1 Don Russell From jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Apr 27 17:10:54 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 13:10:54 -0400 Subject: FE Package Status of Apr 27, 2006 In-Reply-To: <20060427165501.GO30652@neu.nirvana> References: <200604271616.k3RGGdQh012166@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <20060427165501.GO30652@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <604aa7910604271010i3246c194sd1fe8a7ac0373062@mail.gmail.com> On 4/27/06, Axel Thimm wrote: > Would that require all gtk/gnome bits to move to extras, too? Ready for the punchline repoquery --repoid=development --alldeps --whatrequires glib glib-devel-1:1.2.10-18.2.2.i386 imlib-1:1.9.13-26.2.1.i386 gdk-pixbuf-1:0.22.0-23.i386 gtk-engines-1:0.12-7.2.1.i386 gtk+-1:1.2.10-50.i386 repoquery --repoid=development --alldeps --whatrequires imlib kdegraphics-7:3.5.2-1.i386 <-------Wtf? imlib-1:1.9.13-26.2.1.i386 gtk-engines-1:0.12-7.2.1.i386 imlib-devel-1:1.9.13-26.2.1.i386 Its not "all the gtk/gnome" stuff that's gonna have to be moved out of Core. Its gonna be kdegraphics that has to be moved out... There is precious little in rawhide in the gnome stack that needs glib/gtk+. It looks like its a set of 6 srpms that would have to be moved: glib gtk+ gdk-pixbuf imlib gtk-engines kdegraphics -jef"The gods of irony are pleased...ironically so"spaleta From wtogami at redhat.com Thu Apr 27 17:44:14 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 13:44:14 -0400 Subject: Archive of bugzilla.fedora.us Message-ID: <445102EE.8070305@redhat.com> Hi Dave, I still have bugzilla.fedora.us that has been read-only for a while now, online mainly for historical value. Sometimes it is useful to go back to the old package reviews in order to understand where a package came from and how decisions going into a package were formed. Do you have any recommendation to archive bugzilla.fedora.us in a frozen read-only form somewhere within Red Hat's infrastructure? I'd like to maintain the current URL's so links don't break, but the server it is currently running on will be retired soon so I need a migration option. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From rdieter at math.unl.edu Thu Apr 27 17:41:33 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:41:33 -0500 Subject: FE Package Status of Apr 27, 2006 In-Reply-To: <604aa7910604271010i3246c194sd1fe8a7ac0373062@mail.gmail.com> References: <200604271616.k3RGGdQh012166@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <20060427165501.GO30652@neu.nirvana> <604aa7910604271010i3246c194sd1fe8a7ac0373062@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 4/27/06, Axel Thimm wrote: > >>Would that require all gtk/gnome bits to move to extras, too? > Ready for the punchline > > repoquery --repoid=development --alldeps --whatrequires glib > glib-devel-1:1.2.10-18.2.2.i386 > imlib-1:1.9.13-26.2.1.i386 > gdk-pixbuf-1:0.22.0-23.i386 > gtk-engines-1:0.12-7.2.1.i386 > gtk+-1:1.2.10-50.i386 > > repoquery --repoid=development --alldeps --whatrequires imlib > kdegraphics-7:3.5.2-1.i386 <-------Wtf? > imlib-1:1.9.13-26.2.1.i386 > gtk-engines-1:0.12-7.2.1.i386 > imlib-devel-1:1.9.13-26.2.1.i386 > > Its not "all the gtk/gnome" stuff that's gonna have to be moved out of > Core. Its gonna be kdegraphics that has to be moved out... There is ^^^^^^^^^^^ That would just break my heart... :) -- Rex From ville.skytta at iki.fi Thu Apr 27 18:28:04 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 21:28:04 +0300 Subject: rpms/proftpd/devel .cvsignore, 1.7, 1.8 proftpd.init, 1.4, 1.5 proftpd.spec, 1.13, 1.14 sources, 1.7, 1.8 In-Reply-To: <4450F378.6080403@city-fan.org> References: <200604211705.k3LH5DTL001073@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <4450F378.6080403@city-fan.org> Message-ID: <1146162484.4846.119.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 17:38 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > rpmlint proftpd-1.3.0-1.fc6.i386.rpm > E: proftpd binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/sbin/proftpd > ['/var/tmp/proftpd-1.3.0-1.fc6-root/usr/sbin'] That would be a security issue. Already Bugzilla'd? > Should the $(DESTDIR) be removed here or is it worse than that? An RPATH pointing to /usr/sbin doesn't sound useful to me. From paul at city-fan.org Thu Apr 27 19:46:14 2006 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 20:46:14 +0100 Subject: rpms/proftpd/devel .cvsignore, 1.7, 1.8 proftpd.init, 1.4, 1.5 proftpd.spec, 1.13, 1.14 sources, 1.7, 1.8 In-Reply-To: <1146162484.4846.119.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <200604211705.k3LH5DTL001073@cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com> <4450F378.6080403@city-fan.org> <1146162484.4846.119.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1146167174.19610.0.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 21:28 +0300, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 17:38 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > > > rpmlint proftpd-1.3.0-1.fc6.i386.rpm > > E: proftpd binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/sbin/proftpd > > ['/var/tmp/proftpd-1.3.0-1.fc6-root/usr/sbin'] > > That would be a security issue. Already Bugzilla'd? It is now. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190122 Paul. From rodrigomenezes12 at yahoo.com.br Thu Apr 27 20:19:01 2006 From: rodrigomenezes12 at yahoo.com.br (Rodrigo Menezes) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 20:19:01 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Brazilian softwares Message-ID: <20060427201901.70342.qmail@web33812.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Guys, We are producing here in Brazil some softwares from local developers. How can I add these software in Fedora-Extras? What do I need to do? Thanks in advance, Rodrigo Menezes --------------------------------- Abra sua conta no Yahoo! Mail - 1GB de espa?o, alertas de e-mail no celular e anti-spam realmente eficaz. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rdieter at math.unl.edu Thu Apr 27 20:28:46 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 15:28:46 -0500 Subject: Brazilian softwares References: <20060427201901.70342.qmail@web33812.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Rodrigo Menezes wrote: > We are producing here in Brazil some softwares from local developers. How > can I add these software in Fedora-Extras? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras particularly: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/NewPackageProcess -- Rex From mattdm at mattdm.org Thu Apr 27 20:43:28 2006 From: mattdm at mattdm.org (Matthew Miller) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:43:28 -0400 Subject: FE Package Status of Apr 27, 2006 In-Reply-To: <200604271616.k3RGGdQh012166@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <200604271616.k3RGGdQh012166@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <20060427204328.GA28456@jadzia.bu.edu> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 06:16:39PM +0200, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > - 3 packages present in the development repo which have no owners entry > bcm43xx-fwcutter perl-Finance-Quote wxPythonGTK2 Oh, hey, I could have sworn wxPythonGTK2 was all removed. It needs to be. -- Matthew Miller mattdm at mattdm.org Boston University Linux ------> From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 27 21:12:16 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:12:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 189342] Python egg spec template In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604272112.k3RLCGtC024809@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Python egg spec template https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189342 ------- Additional Comments From ivazquez at ivazquez.net 2006-04-27 17:12 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > fedora-newrpmspec should still continue to use the generic python template, no? Of course. This would be added as another template, not replace the existing one. > Due to the two potential issues above, I'd be inclined to just drop the example > %files entries. Sounds sane to me. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From seg at haxxed.com Thu Apr 27 21:31:21 2006 From: seg at haxxed.com (Callum Lerwick) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:31:21 -0500 Subject: RFC: FESCo Future In-Reply-To: <1146128788.31774.34.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1145818390.2767.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424131741.GC3827@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <1145887314.986.132.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145887765.27889.2.camel@cutter> <1145888203.986.140.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <1145888961.27889.14.camel@cutter> <1145890530.986.157.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060425104814.GN22731@eeyore.32.boerneef.vornavalley> <1146123908.7621.104.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1146128788.31774.34.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1146173482.7621.154.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 11:06 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > There is a fundamental difference between an open source project and a > > nation. "Cyberspace" is effectively infinite. Physical space... isn't. > > One of the very cornerstones of open source is the ability to fork. > > However, forking a nation is next to impossible, > You're not German nor Korean? "Go over there" had been a common > sentence, people being dissatisfied with West Germany's system were > confronted with from right wingers, not too long ago. Well around here everyone talks about moving to Canada. But then the cost of getting Canadian citizenship is high, because Canada doesn't want us... This would be jumping ship to a different project/distribution/nation, which is completely different from a fork. > > The strongest open source projects tend to have a Benevolent Dictator > > for Life. > Any dictatorship can only work if a dictator has sufficient powers to > pressurize "his people" or if he finds a sufficient number of > opportunists to follow. The nature of a "dictatorship" in an open source project is fundamentally different. Thanks to the relatively low cost of forking or jumping ship, a benevolent dictator only has as much power as the the community gives them, for only as long as the community supports them. The power structure is essentially reversed. So now I'm starting to understand the view that in practice, its essentially a democracy, wherein everyone votes with their feet... -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Apr 27 21:32:36 2006 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:32:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 189342] Python egg spec template In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200604272132.k3RLWahQ029333@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Python egg spec template https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189342 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2006-04-27 17:32 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) > This would be added as another template, not replace the existing one. I didn't mean to replace it, but that one can't tell from the package name that it's an egg so newrpmspec couldn't currently auto-select it for any new packages. > > I'd be inclined to just drop the example %files entries. > Sounds sane to me. After that change, the only difference to the current python spec template would be the python-setuptools build dependency and --single-version-externally-managed argument to setup.py, and that's no longer something that I think warrants a different spec template. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From ville.skytta at iki.fi Thu Apr 27 21:45:14 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 00:45:14 +0300 Subject: FE Package Status of Apr 27, 2006 In-Reply-To: <20060427204328.GA28456@jadzia.bu.edu> References: <200604271616.k3RGGdQh012166@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <20060427204328.GA28456@jadzia.bu.edu> Message-ID: <1146174314.4846.140.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 16:43 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 06:16:39PM +0200, Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote: > > - 3 packages present in the development repo which have no owners entry > > bcm43xx-fwcutter perl-Finance-Quote wxPythonGTK2 > > Oh, hey, I could have sworn wxPythonGTK2 was all removed. It needs to be. --> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/FC6Status From seg at haxxed.com Thu Apr 27 21:48:28 2006 From: seg at haxxed.com (Callum Lerwick) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:48:28 -0500 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: References: <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <200604271202.k3RC26Jq008968@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1146141362.12671.33.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1146174510.7621.160.camel@localhost.localdomain> I don't see any messages in the fedora-package-announce archives, so I don't understand what exactly is going there. But one thing that annoyed me about fedora-announce-list was having to put up with (often duplicate) updates in FC4. I don't run FC4, I really don't care. I ended up unsubscribing, and instead subscribing to the FC5 and FE5 rss feeds. Finally, a use for rss... -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugzilla at drussell.dnsalias.com Thu Apr 27 21:52:51 2006 From: bugzilla at drussell.dnsalias.com (Don Russell) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:52:51 -0700 Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <1146174510.7621.160.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <200604271202.k3RC26Jq008968@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <1146141362.12671.33.camel@cutter> <1146174510.7621.160.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <44513D33.90800@drussell.dnsalias.com> On 4/27/2006 2:48 PM, Callum Lerwick wrote: > I don't see any messages in the fedora-package-announce archives, so I > don't understand what exactly is going there. The change takes effect Monday 1 May.... they just announced the list in case people wanted to pre-set mail filters. :-) > But one thing that annoyed me about fedora-announce-list was having to > put up with (often duplicate) updates in FC4. I don't run FC4, I really > don't care. Ditto... I remove the FC4 stuff with mail filters... Don From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Thu Apr 27 11:50:22 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 13:50:22 +0200 (CEST) Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <20060426215759.GA5454@free.fr> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146073019.8655.12.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060426215759.GA5454@free.fr> Message-ID: <12082.192.54.193.51.1146138622.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le Mer 26 avril 2006 23:58, Patrice Dumas a ?crit : >> If the repository is not to be aggressively pruned (at least in devel, >> keeping stuff in existing releases is something else) I'd really love if >> all the convenient-but-really-dangerous-to-use-long-term stuff was moved > > What is your definition for a > convenient-but-really-dangerous-to-use-long-term package? I don't see > any other than 'no packager is willing to maintain it'. 1. no packager is willing to maintain it 2. upstream is dead or has decided to switch to another preferred version/something else 3. known vulns/design problems 4. (for a lib) nothing depends on it in the repo, so there's no one to check it actually works 5. (for a lib) almost nothing depends on it, and the few remaining users are scheduled to switch in the next month 6. (for an app) depends on a lib/susbsystem which falls under the previous rules Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Thu Apr 27 11:40:07 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 13:40:07 +0200 (CEST) Subject: weekly "new pacakges in Extras" (Was: Fedora Package Announcement List Split) In-Reply-To: <20060427100113.GH30652@neu.nirvana> References: <444F9ACF.3050800@redhat.com> <1146124978.16095.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060427100113.GH30652@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <35921.192.54.193.51.1146138007.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Hi, Thid kind of info seems better served by a well-publicised on-line status page somewhere rather than mailing it to everywhere. The lists are already too heavy on status messages IMHO. Either you don't need the info now and it's a kind of annoyance, or you need it later and fishing the mail from the archives is not much better. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Apr 28 05:46:56 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 07:46:56 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL Message-ID: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Hi all! The proposals for the Security SIG (from now on called "Fedora Extras Security Response Team") and the EOL Plans for older Fedora Extras releases linger around for some time already -- but ATM they are stuck a bit. Partly that's maybe my and FESCo's fault, but both topics are controversial (even within FESCo there are different opinions how to actually solve all the issues) and that's probably the biggest problem. Anyway, we need to get the ball running somehow. That's what I'm trying to achieve with this mail. Why both topics together? Well, one part of the EOL planing IMHO depends on a bit on parts of the Security Response Team. So, this is my proposal ("my" actually is the wrong word -- it are other proposals put together and one mail and slightly enhanced/modified/clarified). First the Security Response Team. Interested in this topic and working on it in the past weeks are at least: Hans de Goede, Jason L Tibbitts III , Dennis Gilmore, Jochen Schmitt, Ville Skytt?, and Josh Bressers. === Fedora Extras Security Response Team Josh Bressers seems to be the one ATM who wants to drive this forward. He volunteered to "to do the initial painful startup work". I suggest he should act as leader of the Security SIG in the beginning The planed Security Response Team has this purposes for now: - Monitor various security information sources for potential security problems (old and new ones) - When an issue is discovered: file appropriate bugs, alerting the maintainer of the need to patch their package. - Maintain list of fixed and unfixed security issues in a public CVS repository (similar how it is done for core) - Create and post announcements for fixed packages to proper mailing lists - Encourage and foster public discussion of various security issues and procedures via the fedora-security mailing list. Those are the most important things for now. There are some things that probably should be implemented and discussed after the Security Response Team is in place: - Handling embargoed issues / Bugs marked as private - A method of high-priority submission to the build system - The Extras project as a whole needs a way for a maintainer to designate that they have dropped maintenance of a particular branch. We need this to know if we need to wait for a maintainer. Besides this most important task there is one more: Normally the maintainers are 100% responsible for the security updates for their own packages -- but - *if the maintainer doesn't respond in x days after a bug was filed* ("x" still needs to be defined -- the wiki has a good scheme that might be the right one) - if the maintainer is on holiday (we have a list in the wiki) - if the package/the specific package branch is orphaned or - if the maintainer needs help The Security Response Team will lend assistance as needed. (Note: There was a small discussion that the latter part of this proposal should be handled by a own SIG/Team/Task Force -- this idea was dropped for now, but can be put back on the table later if it should be needed) === EOL. When a Fedora Core release reaches Maintenance state (such as Fedora Core 3 reached when Fedora Core 5 Test 2 was released), the corresponding release of Fedora Extras will also enter a Maintenance state. In this state maintainers will be allowed to issue updates to existing packages, but Maintainers are strongly urged to only issue severe bugfix or security fixes. New software versions should be avoided except when necessary for resolving issues with the the current version. Branches for new packages in CVS are not created for Distributions that are in Maintenance state. FESCo can approve exceptions of this rule if there are good reasons for it. The official package maintainers are urged to fix their packages also for Distributions that are in Maintenance state. They should work hand in hand with the "Security Response Team" in case they don't have access to older distros anymore to test their updates. When the Fedora Project drops support for a Fedora Core release the corresponding Fedora Extras is also dropped -- read this as "End-of-life, no new updates,support for that EOL distro will be removed from the Extras buildsys". The EOL Policy depends on the creation and a working Security Response Team and especially the part of it that "will lend assistance as needed" if the maintainer is unable to fix the package -- if that group does not start working properly until June 15 2006 we'll send out a EOL for Fedora Extras 3 -- means: "Packagers can still update things in cvs and build updates for now, but the official state of Fedora Extras 3 is 'unsupported and End of Life'". In that case we'll try to improve for FE4 and later. ==== Comments please. FESCo will probably vote on this proposal (or an enhanced version if the discussion on this list has productive results) of it in the next meeting. Of course everybody can bring in other proposals and we'll pick the one that seems to be the best. CU thl From mattdm at mattdm.org Fri Apr 28 05:52:57 2006 From: mattdm at mattdm.org (Matthew Miller) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 01:52:57 -0400 Subject: FE Package Status of Apr 27, 2006 In-Reply-To: <1146174314.4846.140.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <200604271616.k3RGGdQh012166@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <20060427204328.GA28456@jadzia.bu.edu> <1146174314.4846.140.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060428055257.GA14456@jadzia.bu.edu> On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 12:45:14AM +0300, Ville Skytt? wrote: > > Oh, hey, I could have sworn wxPythonGTK2 was all removed. It needs to be. > --> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/FC6Status Yeh, I know. I just had actually thought it was gone before. -- Matthew Miller mattdm at mattdm.org Boston University Linux ------> From michael at knox.net.nz Fri Apr 28 06:44:28 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 18:44:28 +1200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <4451B9CC.4080705@knox.net.nz> Sounds great! My hand is raised nice and high to help with both aspects (if needed). Michael Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Hi all! > > The proposals for the Security SIG (from now on called "Fedora Extras > Security Response Team") and the EOL Plans for older Fedora > Extras releases linger around for some time already -- but ATM they are > stuck a bit. Partly that's maybe my and FESCo's fault, but both topics > are controversial (even within FESCo there are different opinions how to > actually solve all the issues) and that's probably the biggest problem. > > Anyway, we need to get the ball running somehow. That's what I'm trying > to achieve with this mail. Why both topics together? Well, one part of > the EOL planing IMHO depends on a bit on parts of the Security Response > Team. > > So, this is my proposal ("my" actually is the wrong word -- it are other > proposals put together and one mail and slightly > enhanced/modified/clarified). First the Security Response Team. > Interested in this topic and working on it in the past weeks are at > least: Hans de Goede, Jason L Tibbitts III , Dennis Gilmore, Jochen > Schmitt, Ville Skytt?, and Josh Bressers. > > > === Fedora Extras Security Response Team > > Josh Bressers seems to be the one ATM who wants to drive this forward. > He volunteered to "to do the initial painful startup work". I suggest he > should act as leader of the Security SIG in the beginning > > The planed Security Response Team has this purposes for now: > > - Monitor various security information sources for potential security > problems (old and new ones) > - When an issue is discovered: file appropriate bugs, alerting the > maintainer of the need to patch their package. > - Maintain list of fixed and unfixed security issues in a public CVS > repository (similar how it is done for core) > - Create and post announcements for fixed packages to proper mailing > lists > - Encourage and foster public discussion of various security issues and > procedures via the fedora-security mailing list. > > Those are the most important things for now. There are some things that > probably should be implemented and discussed after the Security Response > Team is in place: > > - Handling embargoed issues / Bugs marked as private > - A method of high-priority submission to the build system > - The Extras project as a whole needs a way for a maintainer to > designate > that they have dropped maintenance of a particular branch. We need > this > to know if we need to wait for a maintainer. > > Besides this most important task there is one more: Normally the > maintainers are 100% responsible for the security updates for their own > packages -- but > > - *if the maintainer doesn't respond in x days after a bug was filed* > ("x" still needs to be defined -- the wiki has a good scheme that might > be the right one) > - if the maintainer is on holiday (we have a list in the wiki) > - if the package/the specific package branch is orphaned > or > - if the maintainer needs help > > The Security Response Team will lend assistance as needed. > > (Note: There was a small discussion that the latter part of this > proposal should be handled by a own SIG/Team/Task Force -- this idea was > dropped for now, but can be put back on the table later if it should be > needed) > > > === EOL. > > When a Fedora Core release reaches Maintenance state (such as Fedora > Core 3 reached when Fedora Core 5 Test 2 was released), the > corresponding release of Fedora Extras will also enter a Maintenance > state. In this state maintainers will be allowed to issue updates to > existing packages, but Maintainers are strongly urged to only issue > severe bugfix or security fixes. New software versions should be avoided > except when necessary for resolving issues with the the current version. > > Branches for new packages in CVS are not created for Distributions > that are in Maintenance state. FESCo can approve exceptions of this rule > if there are good reasons for it. The official package maintainers are > urged to fix their packages also for Distributions that are in > Maintenance state. They should work hand in hand with the "Security > Response Team" in case they don't have access to older > distros anymore to test their updates. > > When the Fedora Project drops support for a Fedora Core release the > corresponding Fedora Extras is also dropped -- read this as > "End-of-life, no new updates,support for that EOL distro will be removed > from the Extras buildsys". > > The EOL Policy depends on the creation and a working Security Response > Team and especially the part of it that "will lend assistance as needed" > if the maintainer is unable to fix the package -- if that group does not > start working properly until June 15 2006 we'll send out a EOL for > Fedora Extras 3 -- means: "Packagers can still update things in cvs and > build updates for now, but the official state of Fedora Extras 3 is > 'unsupported and End of Life'". In that case we'll try to improve for > FE4 and later. > > ==== > > Comments please. FESCo will probably vote on this proposal (or an > enhanced version if the discussion on this list has productive results) > of it in the next meeting. Of course everybody can bring in other > proposals and we'll pick the one that seems to be the best. > > CU > thl > From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Fri Apr 28 07:53:34 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:53:34 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <20060428075334.GB5957@neu.nirvana> On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 07:46:56AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > When a Fedora Core release reaches Maintenance state (such as Fedora > Core 3 reached when Fedora Core 5 Test 2 was released), the > corresponding release of Fedora Extras will also enter a Maintenance > state. In this state maintainers will be allowed to issue updates to > existing packages, but Maintainers are strongly urged to only issue > severe bugfix or security fixes. New software versions should be avoided > except when necessary for resolving issues with the the current version. Currently there are five releases in maintenance mode, aka managed by fedora legacy. Maybe in the future this will decrease, but somehow whenever legacy tries to kick out a release some people start crying and it is kept. But let's assume 3-4 releases on the average in the future. For a package maintainer that covers a package that has lived in these releases this means 3-4 additional versions/specifles of the software to maintain, e.g. (hopfully only) one version for the current 2 active FCs and in the worse case 3-4 further distinct specfiles to look out for. I guess the packager will wish that upcoming releases will fix severe bugs or security flaws to allow him to sync all his trees ;) To cut a long story short: I would soften the above requirement and make it a recommendation or similar. And I would also include the legacy folks in this discussion (Cc'd), as all of this very much depends on the EOL/concurrent releases policies there. Some (unfinished?) thoughts about extras in legacy have already been discussed in the past, and the outcome may prove valuable. I also think that the organisational separation of core vs extras blurs in legacy mode, as legacy for core is already in a community driven entity like extras is, so convergence is easier in that domain. legacy is a community security response team for core and creating a second for extras doesn't sound right, it's better to consolidate forces. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Apr 28 08:06:06 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 10:06:06 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428075334.GB5957@neu.nirvana> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428075334.GB5957@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1146211566.20749.2.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Freitag, den 28.04.2006, 09:53 +0200 schrieb Axel Thimm: > legacy is a community security response team for core and > creating a second for extras doesn't sound right, it's better to > consolidate forces. legacy does not want the job afaics. CU thl From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 28 09:31:33 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 11:31:33 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428075334.GB5957@neu.nirvana> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428075334.GB5957@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <20060428113133.1b4a3fb6.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:53:34 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > I also think that the organisational separation of core vs extras > blurs in legacy mode, as legacy for core is already in a community > driven entity like extras is, so convergence is easier in that > domain. legacy is a community security response team for core and > creating a second for extras doesn't sound right, it's better to > consolidate forces. Fedora Legacy may be part of the Fedora Project, but apparently they still run their own servers and are not fully integrated [yet]. That also means that their updates for FC3 do not show up at download.fedora.redhat.com and official mirrors thereof. For Fedora Extras packagers this means, they must follow the separate Fedora Legacy project for any release of FC which has been declared legacy. Does the Fedora Extras buildsystem build against Fedora Legacy Updates for FC3? From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 28 10:20:45 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:20:45 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> Hello, I agree on the security SIG part. On the EOL part, I know I have allready said thoses things repeatedly, and I hope I am not perceived as being counter-productive, but I'll repeat again... > === EOL. > > state. In this state maintainers will be allowed to issue updates to > existing packages, but Maintainers are strongly urged to only issue > severe bugfix or security fixes. New software versions should be avoided > except when necessary for resolving issues with the the current version. I don't think this constraint is productive. As Axel said keeping spec files synced is simpler most of the time for the packager. And for the users it depends, some want updates other don't. I would prefer something along Maintainers are urged to consider that many users expect that only severe bugfix or security fixes are fixed in maintainance state. However packagers may still update their packages if they find it more convenient or if they perceive that enough users want an update. This is fuzzy, but I think it is better that way. > Branches for new packages in CVS are not created for Distributions > that are in Maintenance state. FESCo can approve exceptions of this rule > if there are good reasons for it. The official package maintainers are I completly disagree with that. If a user don't want new packages that entered extras while in maintainance state he shouldn't install new packages. In my opinion the maintainer could be able to add new packages for distributions in maintainance state, if he is confident that he will maintain it. For me the only rule should be When creating branches for distributions that are in maintainance state the packager should understand that he is commiting to maintain them. But it is the same for active distributions, and this commitment is still on a voluntary basis. > urged to fix their packages also for Distributions that are in > Maintenance state. They should work hand in hand with the "Security > Response Team" in case they don't have access to older > distros anymore to test their updates. What about co-maintainership, if a maintainer volunteers for maintaining the old branches? > When the Fedora Project drops support for a Fedora Core release the > corresponding Fedora Extras is also dropped -- read this as > "End-of-life, no new updates,support for that EOL distro will be removed > from the Extras buildsys". Agreed. > The EOL Policy depends on the creation and a working Security Response > Team and especially the part of it that "will lend assistance as needed" > if the maintainer is unable to fix the package -- if that group does not > start working properly until June 15 2006 we'll send out a EOL for > Fedora Extras 3 -- means: "Packagers can still update things in cvs and > build updates for now, but the official state of Fedora Extras 3 is > 'unsupported and End of Life'". In that case we'll try to improve for > FE4 and later. What is the meaning of 'supported' for FE4 and FE5? I consider that FE is unsupported (as in the no waarranty clause of free software licences) being a project based on volunteering. Anyway, beside all that I said above I think that, as long as the infrastructure and the guideline are kept unchanged, I am all for saying "Packagers can still update things in cvs and build updates for now, but the official state of Fedora Extras 3 is 'unsupported and End of Life'" regardless whether there is a security team which will be nice and helpfull, but even more for current versions than for eol/in maintainance versions. -- Pat From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Apr 28 10:50:27 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:50:27 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> Message-ID: <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Freitag, den 28.04.2006, 12:20 +0200 schrieb Patrice Dumas: > > === EOL. > > > > state. In this state maintainers will be allowed to issue updates to > > existing packages, but Maintainers are strongly urged to only issue > > severe bugfix or security fixes. New software versions should be avoided > > except when necessary for resolving issues with the the current version. > > I don't think this constraint is productive. As Axel said keeping > spec files synced is simpler most of the time for the packager. The user IMHO is more important than the packager. > And for > the users it depends, some want updates other don't.[...] Doing both (e.g. 50% of the packagers update their packages to new versions, the other 50% only fix bugs) is IMHO the worst we can do. If people want new stuff they are probably installing new distribution versions in any case (not all, but most). That's why I prefer "normally no big updates" variant for those that prefer a stable distributions. > > Branches for new packages in CVS are not created for Distributions > > that are in Maintenance state. FESCo can approve exceptions of this rule > > if there are good reasons for it. The official package maintainers are > I completly disagree with that. If a user don't want new packages that > entered extras while in maintainance state he shouldn't install new > packages. In my opinion the maintainer could be able to add new packages > for distributions in maintainance state, if he is confident that he > will maintain it. [...] I can live with that if others agree with it. But there were some people in FESCo that don't like this idea. > > urged to fix their packages also for Distributions that are in > > Maintenance state. They should work hand in hand with the "Security > > Response Team" in case they don't have access to older > > distros anymore to test their updates. > What about co-maintainership, if a maintainer volunteers for maintaining > the old branches? I left co-maintainership (and your proposal) out for now because it would have complicated things even more. But we should work on the details for "co-maintainership" soon. >[...] > > The EOL Policy depends on the creation and a working Security Response > > Team and especially the part of it that "will lend assistance as needed" > > if the maintainer is unable to fix the package -- if that group does not > > start working properly until June 15 2006 we'll send out a EOL for > > Fedora Extras 3 -- means: "Packagers can still update things in cvs and > > build updates for now, but the official state of Fedora Extras 3 is > > 'unsupported and End of Life'". In that case we'll try to improve for > > FE4 and later. > > What is the meaning of 'supported' for FE4 and FE5? Good question. > I consider that > FE is unsupported (as in the no waarranty clause of free software licences) > being a project based on volunteering. Maybe -- but that's not a reason to leave known security bugs unfixed ;-) > Anyway, beside all that I said above I think that, as long as the > infrastructure and the guideline are kept unchanged, I am all for saying > > "Packagers can still update things in cvs and > build updates for now, but the official state of Fedora Extras 3 is > 'unsupported and End of Life'" > > regardless whether there is a security team which will be nice and helpfull, > but even more for current versions than for eol/in maintainance versions. I tend to "lets give the Security Response Team some (two? three?) months and revisit the EOL plans then again" ATM CU thl From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 28 11:43:46 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 13:43:46 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <20060428114346.GA2315@free.fr> > > I don't think this constraint is productive. As Axel said keeping > > spec files synced is simpler most of the time for the packager. > > The user IMHO is more important than the packager. Maybe, but in a project based on voluntary work from packagers, putting constraint on them is likely to decrease their reactivness, and in turn it will harm the users. Otherwise said, if the "no updates" policy has for consequence "Backporting is too much work, I won't bother for that EOL FE branch, let the security SIG do the backport if they want to", it is not a win for the user in my opinion. > Doing both (e.g. 50% of the packagers update their packages to new > versions, the other 50% only fix bugs) is IMHO the worst we can do. If Why? Why couldn't it be acceptable that different packages have different user base, different need for updates vs bugfixes (be it in FE current or EOL), different risk of breaking stuff if updated versus security fixes backported, different criticality, such that the risk of breaking stuff by updating is offset by the time the packager loss by doing extra work for EOL branches for some packages, and not for others? > > I completly disagree with that. If a user don't want new packages that > > entered extras while in maintainance state he shouldn't install new > > packages. In my opinion the maintainer could be able to add new packages > > for distributions in maintainance state, if he is confident that he > > will maintain it. [...] > > I can live with that if others agree with it. But there were some people > in FESCo that don't like this idea. Why? The only reason that seems relevant to me is if it puts too much pressure on the build sys, takes resources (disk space, badnwdth), or requires somebody else than the maintainers work. > I left co-maintainership (and your proposal) out for now because it > would have complicated things even more. Agreed. That's better if issues are not mixed, sorry for that. > > What is the meaning of 'supported' for FE4 and FE5? > > Good question. ;-) > > FE is unsupported (as in the no waarranty clause of free software licences) > > being a project based on volunteering. > > Maybe -- but that's not a reason to leave known security bugs > unfixed ;-) Of course, but let's not mix that issue with the fedora extras EOL issue. > I tend to "lets give the Security Response Team some (two? three?) > months and revisit the EOL plans then again" ATM I don't think the 2 issues of security team and FE EOL should be mixed. -- Pat From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 28 12:04:15 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:04:15 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <12082.192.54.193.51.1146138622.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146073019.8655.12.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060426215759.GA5454@free.fr> <12082.192.54.193.51.1146138622.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20060428120415.GC2315@free.fr> > 2. upstream is dead or has decided to switch to another preferred > version/something else Upstream is dead is not relevant. Some usefull but stable apps have no upstream and that's not an issue. For an example there is asa, a package that convert fortran carriage control characters I maintain which has no upstream, but don't need one. > 3. known vulns/design problems Also shouldn't be a blocker. For example I maintain the cernlib in extras which has an upstream which is dead (except that the debian maintainer is a kind of upstream), it has some major design flows in the build system, ship some daemons that run as root, and, although they have no known issue haven't been audited seriously as far as I know. Is it a reason not to ship them? A user using those daemons should do that on purpose, more precisely I think that the cernlib users are not lambda users so having those issues in the cernlib is not a problem. For other packages it may be, but different packages have different user bases. Moreover it is said in the description I quote here: %description packlib I/O, network and miscalleneous utilities based on the CERN Program Library. According to the responsible of the cernlib debian package, some of these utilities may have security flaws. I personally think that it is acceptable and shouldn't be a reason not to ship those programs and even less not to ship the cernlib as a whole. Otherwise said fool users that install and and run random programs without knowing the consequences shouldn't stop those who use programs with flaws on purpose in an environemnt where it makes sense. To me it is the same with static versus shared libs. The fact that some uses of static libraries are broken, and that in some cases static don't make sense at all shouldn't prevent to ship static libs in the other cases for the users that have a relevant use of thoses libs. > 4. (for a lib) nothing depends on it in the repo, so there's no one to > check it actually works But a lib may be usefull in itself! > 5. (for a lib) almost nothing depends on it, and the few remaining users > are scheduled to switch in the next month In that case the maintainer should be smart enough to avoid propagating the lib to devel and to the following fedora version. > 6. (for an app) depends on a lib/susbsystem which falls under the previous > rules Agreed, in the sense that apps depends on orphaned libs should be considered as also in a kind of orphaned state. -- Pat From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 28 12:12:48 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:12:48 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <20060428141248.1977f2df.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:50:27 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Freitag, den 28.04.2006, 12:20 +0200 schrieb Patrice Dumas: > > > And for > > the users it depends, some want updates other don't.[...] > > Doing both (e.g. 50% of the packagers update their packages to new > versions, the other 50% only fix bugs) is IMHO the worst we can do. If > people want new stuff they are probably installing new distribution > versions in any case (not all, but most). That's why I prefer "normally > no big updates" variant for those that prefer a stable distributions. Exactly. Legacy distributions don't make these users happy at all, since, for example, KDE remains at 3.4.2 compared with upstream. Users, who are in search of fresh software, want the current or most recent release of FC+FE. They upgrade. > > > Branches for new packages in CVS are not created for Distributions > > > that are in Maintenance state. FESCo can approve exceptions of this rule > > > if there are good reasons for it. The official package maintainers are > > I completly disagree with that. If a user don't want new packages that > > entered extras while in maintainance state he shouldn't install new > > packages. In my opinion the maintainer could be able to add new packages > > for distributions in maintainance state, if he is confident that he > > will maintain it. [...] > > I can live with that if others agree with it. But there were some people > in FESCo that don't like this idea. Time spent on trying to keep legacy branches alive is missing in other areas. I'd rather see Extras packagers track Rawhide and prepare for the next release of FC, so we have something to offer at the time of release of Test1. Version upgrades in old branches--especially those which are done without careful testing (like closed-eyes copy-to-branch-and-build updates)--increase the risk of resulting in regression, dead-end breakage and increased maintenance requirements. Such as but not limited to requiring further version upgrades in build requirements or in dependencies maintained by other packages (with Epoch bump or package withdrawal as a worst-case). > > > urged to fix their packages also for Distributions that are in > > > Maintenance state. They should work hand in hand with the "Security > > > Response Team" in case they don't have access to older > > > distros anymore to test their updates. > > What about co-maintainership, if a maintainer volunteers for maintaining > > the old branches? > > I left co-maintainership (and your proposal) out for now because it > would have complicated things even more. > > But we should work on the details for "co-maintainership" soon. Co-maintainership, yes. Entering another discussion which loops back and forth without agreement, no. Please, for now leave out the hypothetical human resources who wish to maintain their own packages for many branches for an undeterminate period of time. So: How about we first define and agree on what level of maintenance we try to offer in Fedora Extras for current releases? These are things we must agree on! What do we try to offer? Ultimate stability? Leading-edge? Bleeding-edge? Version upgrade races with upstream? No goals at all? This thread even has the term "security" in the subject line. So: We do agree that current branches of FE shall be kept safe with security updates and that a security response team shall intervene where package maintainers cannot/do not react in time. Do we agree on that? That would be one step away from the infamous dumping ground. If we agree on how we try to maintain the current branch(es), we can proceed to finding out what additional or different policies, procedures and resources may be needed for legacy branches. We do agree that package maintainers may abandon their packages for legacy branches, don't we? A marker-file in CVS is easy to do, an unimportant implementation detail. A security response team (or co-maintainers, whatever, it doesn't matter) would need to take over those packages. Thorsten's message even tried to address that issue and added June 15 2006 as a time limit for proof of activity of the security response team. If packagers are permitted to add entirely new packages to legacy branches of FE, this may increase the maintenance burden for the security rt, since a) the packager cannot guarantee that he does the maintenance himself for an undeterminate period of time, and b) neither can he be forced to do it. > > What is the meaning of 'supported' for FE4 and FE5? > > Good question. No. Read on. > > I consider that > > FE is unsupported (as in the no waarranty clause of free software licences) > > being a project based on volunteering. > Silly. Look up the word "support" in a dictionary! The support we at Fedora Extras offer [or try to offer with no guarantees] is the level of maintenance: creation of packages, reviews, updates, upgrades, responses to bug reports, bug fixes, communication with upstream developers, monitoring of upstream activity wrt bugs, availability of servers and repositories, availability of rebuilds for FC(n+1), [...] From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Fri Apr 28 12:20:07 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:20:07 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428114346.GA2315@free.fr> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428114346.GA2315@free.fr> Message-ID: <20060428122007.GF5957@neu.nirvana> On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 01:43:46PM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > > FE is unsupported (as in the no waarranty clause of free software licences) > > > being a project based on volunteering. > > > > Maybe -- but that's not a reason to leave known security bugs > > unfixed ;-) > > Of course, but let's not mix that issue with the fedora extras EOL issue. I think this is inevitable. The end of the time span where one commits to fix security issues is by definition the EOL. When you talk about EOLs, different phases in the life times of a product and similar, you need to keep it in the picture. Let's forget about the coining of the word "supported" as in "there are SLAs". This definition is important for Red Hat's relationship to Fedora, but is otherwise only confusing. There are two phases to FC and FE, one which is the active mode, where packages get both security fixes, bug fixes and enhancements, and the other is a phase we try to define, which at the very least has security and bugfixes. The questions are: o forbid/obstruct enhancements or easy-bugfixes in the second phase? For a release like RHL/RHEL one can see the reason why, you want a stable ABI and these did offer it. So you need to be conservative as a large userbase will remain with these due to the ABI. But FC has no stable ABI, so this reason can be skipped. People that will want to run FC3 in 6 months just don't have the time to do the upgrade, it's not that they have a lock-in by third party propriatarey applications, they are running RHEL for that. So I believe that there is no pressure to be conservative about upstream upgrading when in maintenance mode. o does it make sense for fedora extras to have better support than fedora core? IMO no, it's like not caring whether the basements stand and building on. This issue is probably trivial, but needs to be taken into account. o Can there be consolidation of forces in fedora (core) legacy and fedora extras legacy? Even if the current group of legacy maintainers are not interested in extras, the about to be formed group should consider joining them and sharing the same methology and resources. So the old legacy members have no additional workload, while the new ones can learn from their experience. And there will certainly be a lot of synergetic effects in the long run. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mpeters at mac.com Fri Apr 28 12:20:57 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 05:20:57 -0700 Subject: Dead Horse (was Re: package EOL) In-Reply-To: <20060428120415.GC2315@free.fr> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146073019.8655.12.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060426215759.GA5454@free.fr> <12082.192.54.193.51.1146138622.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060428120415.GC2315@free.fr> Message-ID: <1146226857.2456.31.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 14:04 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > To me it is the same with static versus shared libs. The fact that > some uses of static libraries are broken, and that in some cases static > don't make sense at all shouldn't prevent to ship static libs in the other > cases for the users that have a relevant use of thoses libs. > While it is a dead horse, I agree with you. Static libraries are useful to some, particularly those who need to build something to support several versions of several distributions. Not shipping them means those they are useful to have to use a different distro, or build the packages on their own. I understand that _packages_ in a distro specific repository _should_ avoid linking statically - but oh well. From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Apr 28 12:22:23 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:22:23 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428114346.GA2315@free.fr> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428114346.GA2315@free.fr> Message-ID: <1146226943.21190.40.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Freitag, den 28.04.2006, 13:43 +0200 schrieb Patrice Dumas: > > > I don't think this constraint is productive. As Axel said keeping > > > spec files synced is simpler most of the time for the packager. > > The user IMHO is more important than the packager. > Maybe, but in a project based on voluntary work from packagers, putting > constraint on them is likely to decrease their reactivness, and in turn > it will harm the users. Sorry. Yes, that's a risk. But the same argument holds true for QA of packages -- still we do QA. > Otherwise said, if the "no updates" policy has > for consequence "Backporting is too much work, I won't bother for that > EOL FE branch, let the security SIG do the backport if they want to", it > is not a win for the user in my opinion. If you have a good idea how to solve it feel free to post it. But letting every packager do what he likes to do is IMHO wrong: > > Doing both (e.g. 50% of the packagers update their packages to new > > versions, the other 50% only fix bugs) is IMHO the worst we can do. If > Why? [...] People from the outside look at Fedora Extras as a single entity. And therefor we IMHO should maintain a consistent look-and-feel to outsiders. > > > I completly disagree with that. If a user don't want new packages that > > > entered extras while in maintainance state he shouldn't install new > > > packages. In my opinion the maintainer could be able to add new packages > > > for distributions in maintainance state, if he is confident that he > > > will maintain it. [...] > > I can live with that if others agree with it. But there were some people > > in FESCo that don't like this idea. > Why? [...] I can't remember the details. Please see the logs from the FESCo Meetings in the wiki. > > > What is the meaning of 'supported' for FE4 and FE5? > > Good question. > ;-) > > > > FE is unsupported (as in the no waarranty clause of free software licences) > > > being a project based on volunteering. > > Maybe -- but that's not a reason to leave known security bugs > > unfixed ;-) > Of course, but let's not mix that issue with the fedora extras EOL issue. > > > I tend to "lets give the Security Response Team some (two? three?) > > months and revisit the EOL plans then again" ATM > I don't think the 2 issues of security team and FE EOL should be mixed. That was already discussed multiple times without a real result. I'm not interested in starting this discussion anew. If you are: Feel free to discuss it here and/or write better proposals to your liking (hint: can be based on this one). Present it to this list and to FESCo. FESCo can cherry-pick the best one then. Note: FESCo really wants this done (it lingers around long time already), so next Thursday is the deadline. Sorry, I know, that's not much time. BTW: Everything FESCo decides now can be reverted/modified later if that should be needed and if there is interest from the community to change something. We don't need to have the proper solution in the beginning. But we have to start somewhere; and that's my goal atm. CU thl From bressers at redhat.com Fri Apr 28 12:30:07 2006 From: bressers at redhat.com (Josh Bressers) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 08:30:07 -0400 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 28 Apr 2006 18:44:28 +1200." <4451B9CC.4080705@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <200604281230.k3SCU7E6032445@devserv.devel.redhat.com> > Sounds great! > > My hand is raised nice and high to help with both aspects (if needed). > > Michael Hi Michael, Right now the best thing to do is to subscribe to the fedora-security-list http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-security-list There is some infrastructure that needs to be setup before anything can really start moving forward. Any help will be appreciated. Thanks. -- JB From rc040203 at freenet.de Fri Apr 28 12:29:49 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:29:49 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428141248.1977f2df.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428141248.1977f2df.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1146227389.31774.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 14:12 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:50:27 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > Am Freitag, den 28.04.2006, 12:20 +0200 schrieb Patrice Dumas: > We do agree that package maintainers may abandon their packages for legacy > branches, don't we? A marker-file in CVS is easy to do, an unimportant > implementation detail. A security response team (or co-maintainers, > whatever, it doesn't matter) would need to take over those packages. Well, security affects all packages, and "security leaks" are very likely to affect all available versions. Therefore, I disagree upon this "strong ownership assignment" in your sentences and can't find it useful. But I don't disagree upon a "security task force intervening/modifying a package", regardless of whether a package is in current or in legacy, no matter if it's orphaned or actively maintained, nor whether a packager is on vacation or suffering from a broken email access. Otherwise we are very likely to see a "Security task force" or "legacy team" fixing bugs in legacy, that will stay open for some time in "current". Or to put it differently: I think you are mixing 2 completely independent issues: * Regular maintenance of "legacy" packages the "nominal maintainer" in current has abandoned to actively maintain. * Security response. Ralf From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Apr 28 12:40:43 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:40:43 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428122007.GF5957@neu.nirvana> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428114346.GA2315@free.fr> <20060428122007.GF5957@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1146228043.21190.48.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Am Freitag, den 28.04.2006, 14:20 +0200 schrieb Axel Thimm: > o Can there be consolidation of forces in fedora (core) legacy and > fedora extras legacy? "fedora extras legacy" is IMHO the wrong term -- I don't like it. I would prefer if we could avoid it. Why? See the discussion about the term "Legacy" that was on fedora-devel some weeks (months?) ago. CU thl From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 28 12:45:04 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:45:04 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428141248.1977f2df.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428141248.1977f2df.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060428124504.GE2315@free.fr> > Time spent on trying to keep legacy branches alive is missing in other > areas. I'd rather see Extras packagers track Rawhide and prepare for the Of course time spent somewhere isn't available elsewhere, still it should be the packager choice. > next release of FC, so we have something to offer at the time of release > of Test1. Version upgrades in old branches--especially those which are Having maintained packages that work with devel should be a requirement, but having packages added to legacy branches shouldn't be prevented. > done without careful testing (like closed-eyes copy-to-branch-and-build > updates)--increase the risk of resulting in regression, dead-end breakage > and increased maintenance requirements. Such as but not limited to > requiring further version upgrades in build requirements or in > dependencies maintained by other packages (with Epoch bump or package > withdrawal as a worst-case). The packagers should be trust to do things right. Of course if the packagers are forbidden to add a package for legacy branch they cannot do things wrong, but it is not the right way to promote quality. > We do agree that current branches of FE shall be kept safe with security > updates and that a security response team shall intervene where package > maintainers cannot/do not react in time. Do we agree on that? I think so. > We do agree that package maintainers may abandon their packages for legacy > branches, don't we? A marker-file in CVS is easy to do, an unimportant > implementation detail. A security response team (or co-maintainers, > whatever, it doesn't matter) would need to take over those packages. Right. > Thorsten's message even tried to address that issue and added June 15 2006 > as a time limit for proof of activity of the security response team. If > packagers are permitted to add entirely new packages to legacy branches of > FE, this may increase the maintenance burden for the security rt, since > a) the packager cannot guarantee that he does the maintenance himself for an > undeterminate period of time, and b) neither can he be forced to do it. Of course, but a packager that add new packages to legacy branches should guarantee that he (or a co-maintainer) is willing to do the maintainance, just like he guarantee that he is willing to maintain the package in current branches. Of course the will may change in the future, but what we can do in that case doesn't seems to be different in the case of legacy than in the case of supported packages/packages branches. > Silly. Look up the word "support" in a dictionary! The support we at > Fedora Extras offer [or try to offer with no guarantees] is the level of > maintenance: creation of packages, reviews, updates, upgrades, responses > to bug reports, bug fixes, communication with upstream developers, > monitoring of upstream activity wrt bugs, availability of servers and > repositories, availability of rebuilds for FC(n+1), [...] Ok, I guess I didn't express myself correctly. In any case I agree with you, with 'try to offer with no guarantees', as there this is a voluntary project. -- Pat From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 28 12:48:53 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:48:53 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <1145999989.21102.7.camel@T7.Linux> <444E992E.3050502@knox.net.nz> <1146002517.21102.24.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <20060428124853.GG2315@free.fr> > > I am not sure if other agree on that approach or not. I do agree. If a packager wants to do it he shouldn't be discouraged (nor encouraged...). > No. I'm not in favour of this approach. IMO, it's actually what has kept > Debian back as a distro. They have *way* too much legacy hanging around > them which makes build times and build sizes insanely huge. I know I've I don't see that as an issue for fedora extras. The buildsys is rarely fully used. For the build size I don't know. Maybe it delays syncing to the mirrors, maybe it eats too much disk? However I guess it isn't due to old apps. > fixed bugs on a few packages I package for FE on z88dk (especially) and > have submitted them to the authors. However, doing this then starts to > eat into other work. > > Sure it's fun, but is it worth it - especially if the upstream > maintainer has dropped the package? It may no be worth it, but it should be up to the packager to decide (that's different from the issue of orphans/unmaintained packages). > Hard one. You can't go on version number or time. Possible answer is if > there is a development branch, if that's dead then the package is > possibly/probably dead. It doesn't mean that it shouldn't be packaged. It may be dead because there isn't anything to improve. > > My point was more, why orphan it if the general consensus is to drop it? > > Should it not be placed in a "dropped" list or something? > > Again. lends weight to my point about the FL branch. If it's dropped > into Legacy and you want to bring it back to a current branch, that's > not a problem, but if it's in Legacy it can be effectively considered > dropped. Orphaned packages that weren't dependencies for other packages have been dropped from FE5 (if I remember correctly). I think it is right. They will completly disappear when FC5 move out of fedora legacy (at least that was the plan, I believe). But it should also be possible not to move on to the devel branch and create a directory for the new release when there is a new fc release, even for non orphaned packages, if a packager think that it is not usefull and nobody is willing to maintainn it for newer releases. I don't know if it is allready possible. -- Pat From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Fri Apr 28 12:54:20 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:54:20 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146228043.21190.48.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428114346.GA2315@free.fr> <20060428122007.GF5957@neu.nirvana> <1146228043.21190.48.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <20060428125420.GA31014@neu.nirvana> On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 02:40:43PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Freitag, den 28.04.2006, 14:20 +0200 schrieb Axel Thimm: > > o Can there be consolidation of forces in fedora (core) legacy and > > fedora extras legacy? > > "fedora extras legacy" is IMHO the wrong term -- I don't like it. I > would prefer if we could avoid it. Why? See the discussion about the > term "Legacy" that was on fedora-devel some weeks (months?) ago. I agree, I never really liked the name (it sounds like a burden), I'm just using it to make the context clear. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk Fri Apr 28 13:29:55 2006 From: paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk (PFJ) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:29:55 +0100 Subject: Setting share-mime-info prefix Message-ID: <1146230995.7948.48.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Hi, I'm trying to build boo inside of mock and it reports a problem when building (it looks like it is trying to put shared mime info into ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}/share rather than ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}/usr/share). What do I need to do to set the shared mime info prefix to be /usr? I've tried export SHARED_MIME_INFO_PREFIX=/usr and a few other variations like this. TTFN Paul -- "Logic, my dear Zoe, is merely the ability to be wrong with authority" - Dr Who From kaboom at oobleck.net Fri Apr 28 13:48:38 2006 From: kaboom at oobleck.net (Chris Ricker) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:48:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> Message-ID: On Fri, 28 Apr 2006, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > Branches for new packages in CVS are not created for Distributions > > that are in Maintenance state. FESCo can approve exceptions of this rule > > if there are good reasons for it. The official package maintainers are > > I completly disagree with that. If a user don't want new packages that > entered extras while in maintainance state he shouldn't install new > packages. In my opinion the maintainer could be able to add new packages > for distributions in maintainance state, if he is confident that he > will maintain it. And I disagree with your disagreement ;-) If you're still adding new packages to maintenance mode branches, what makes them different from non-maintenance mode? Packagers who want to build new stuff for maintenance branches should do it outside the Fedora build infrastructure -- the whole point of maintenance mode is to reduce the amount of infrastructure work needed to keep Fedora going to something manageable with the amount of resources Fedora has. People who want new packages should upgrade. Maintenance mode is there only as a security / bugfix only courtesy for those who can't upgrade. We want to encourage upgrading as much as possible, however later, chris From rdieter at math.unl.edu Fri Apr 28 13:52:13 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 08:52:13 -0500 Subject: Setting share-mime-info prefix References: <1146230995.7948.48.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> Message-ID: PFJ wrote: > I'm trying to build boo inside of mock and it reports a problem when > building (it looks like it is trying to put shared mime info into > ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}/share rather than ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}/usr/share). What > do I need to do to set the shared mime info prefix to be /usr? It's likely broken configure/autoconf/Makefiles of boo, which may require patching. -- Rex From jspaleta at gmail.com Fri Apr 28 14:31:59 2006 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 10:31:59 -0400 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> Message-ID: <604aa7910604280731k1c2df95do9a190adff6ee30a9@mail.gmail.com> On 4/28/06, Chris Ricker wrote: > If you're still adding new packages to maintenance mode branches, what > makes them different from non-maintenance mode? Packagers who want to > build new stuff for maintenance branches should do it outside the Fedora > build infrastructure -- the whole point of maintenance mode is to reduce > the amount of infrastructure work needed to keep Fedora going to something > manageable with the amount of resources Fedora has. > > People who want new packages should upgrade. Maintenance mode is there > only as a security / bugfix only courtesy for those who can't upgrade. We > want to encourage upgrading as much as possible, however Perhaps as an additional courtesy there can be scratch areas setup for the releases in maintenance mode inside the buildsys for people to run private builds of 'new' packages which they then publish somewhere else. The idea being allow people to use the extras infrastructure to hold the specs and do the binary builds.. just don't publish these new packages as part of extras. While i personally like the idea of making a maintenance mode devoid of large version shifts as updates, i think it will be impossible to effectively enforce as a policy. Unless there is an additional mechanism put in place to review pending changes for appropriateness (something i don't think we have the manpower to even attempt), 'discouraging people from doing it' is unimplementable beyond more than a meme to be repeated in discussion so there really isn't anything to be up in arms about. To take the edge of the issue I would suggest any statement which gets encoded as guidance to maintainers read like this: 'When working with FE releases which have entered maintainence mode, we(FESCO) would encourage you to focus your time on using patches for security or severe crash issues when choosing to push updates to your packages. If you find you are in a situation where you are considering pushing a new upstream version release as an update for a maintainence release, please jump onto the fedora-extras-list(or maybe fedora-maintainers-list) and start a discussion on the situation. We(FESCO) would like to see discussion to track how often these situations occur and to understand if there are general trends which can be addressed through policy or infrastructure changes in the future." -jef"volunteerism is not about doing whatever you want with the access to the tools the managing organization grants you access to. Volunteerism is about purposed action, within a set of guidelines that you as a volunteer agree to. Organizations which do not provide strong guidance aimed at focusing the available resources, like manhours, on the important pre-defined goals(goals volunteers agree to work towards but have no say in setting those goals) fail in a much more spectacular manner than organizations which are consistently understaffed. Under-staffed organizations with a clear purpose continue to function and adjust the scale of their operations accordingly. Organizations that have a lot of 'members' but no way to manage how 'members' time is spent languish in a state where nothing gets done. I am personally less concerned about Extras loosing some maintainers over policy restrictions, than I am about better defining the focus to aid in long term resource management"spaleta From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 28 14:33:35 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 16:33:35 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> Message-ID: <20060428143335.GB2317@free.fr> > And I disagree with your disagreement ;-) ;-) > If you're still adding new packages to maintenance mode branches, what > makes them different from non-maintenance mode? Packagers who want to I am against a difference between maintenance and non maintenance branch, other than putting big warnings to packagers and users (to packagers "many users are likely willing to have only bugfixes, you may be using bandwidth and disk space for nothing" and to users "this is in maintenance mode, don't except new upgrades, although they may happen"). > build new stuff for maintenance branches should do it outside the Fedora > build infrastructure -- the whole point of maintenance mode is to reduce > the amount of infrastructure work needed to keep Fedora going to something > manageable with the amount of resources Fedora has. Not doing anything special for maintenance branches is the better way to reduce the amount of infrastructure work needed to keep Fedora going. I don't think the load on the buildsys is relevant here, at least it is not my impression. For the disk space and bandwidth I don't know. Doing that outside of the fedora infrastructure would in my opinion be a big loss, because the packagers that want to do it would have to reproduce the buildsys and it will be very costly for them, preventing them to work on other things. To put it otherwise, the marginal cost for fedora buildsys accepting builds for new packages for new branches is negligible, due to the tremendous amount of economies of scale associated with the functionning of the buildsys. > People who want new packages should upgrade. Maintenance mode is there > only as a security / bugfix only courtesy for those who can't upgrade. We Why? As long as it doesn't impact the common resources. > want to encourage upgrading as much as possible, however Why not let the users decide for themselves? -- Pat From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 28 15:12:25 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 17:12:25 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146227389.31774.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428141248.1977f2df.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146227389.31774.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20060428171225.a7adbf87.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:29:49 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > Or to put it differently: I think you are mixing 2 completely > independent issues: > * Regular maintenance of "legacy" packages the "nominal maintainer" in > current has abandoned to actively maintain. > * Security response. Well, I tried to separate these two. But others didn't like the idea of a "Fedora Extras Legacy Team" (= the combined set of Fedora Extras Contributors who still support old legacy branches). Currently I still don't _who_ would maintain old legacy packages, if not the Fedora Extras Security Response Team. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 28 15:14:38 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 17:14:38 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428124504.GE2315@free.fr> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428141248.1977f2df.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060428124504.GE2315@free.fr> Message-ID: <20060428171438.eb8d10ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:45:04 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > The packagers should be trust to do things right. > Of course, but a packager that add new packages to legacy branches > should guarantee that he (or a co-maintainer) is willing to do the > maintainance, just like he guarantee that he is willing to maintain the > package in current branches. That is contradictory to what you've written earlier. Here you talk of "guarantees". Earlier you went the "no guarantees, no promises, no warranty" road. Doesn't work for me. From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 28 15:22:23 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 17:22:23 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428171438.eb8d10ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428141248.1977f2df.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060428124504.GE2315@free.fr> <20060428171438.eb8d10ef.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060428152222.GB2481@free.fr> > > The packagers should be trust to do things right. > > > Of course, but a packager that add new packages to legacy branches > > should guarantee that he (or a co-maintainer) is willing to do the > > maintainance, just like he guarantee that he is willing to maintain the > > package in current branches. > > That is contradictory to what you've written earlier. Here you talk > of "guarantees". Earlier you went the "no guarantees, no promises, > no warranty" road. Doesn't work for me. My point is that individual packagers should be willing to maintain the packages they propose when they make them enter fedora, whatever version. But as nobody may be forced to do anything, the FE project as a whole cannot make any promise other than try to have proper infrastructure and policies that helps finding unmaintained packages, co-maintainership, quicker bugfixing and so on. -- Pat From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 28 15:37:56 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 17:37:56 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146226943.21190.40.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428114346.GA2315@free.fr> <1146226943.21190.40.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <20060428153756.GC2481@free.fr> > > Maybe, but in a project based on voluntary work from packagers, putting > > constraint on them is likely to decrease their reactivness, and in turn > > it will harm the users. > > Sorry. Yes, that's a risk. But the same argument holds true for QA of > packages -- still we do QA. Indeed but it is not a fair comparison. Those constraints are not based on quality or on technical issues, but on user expectations. There is nothing in the QA about users expectations. Everything that is free may be packaged. > People from the outside look at Fedora Extras as a single entity. And > therefor we IMHO should maintain a consistent look-and-feel to > outsiders. Maybe then we should educate users not to look at Fedora Extras as a single entity? The software in fedora extras is very inhomogenous and there is no consistent look and feel, it doesn't make sense. In my opinion a numerical library intended for scientists is very different from a rss feed viewer but fortunately they coexist in extras. Why force an artificial ook and feel on the packagers and the users? In my opinion what should be consistent accross fedora extras is the level of quality not anything else. > I can't remember the details. Please see the logs from the FESCo > Meetings in the wiki. I may not have read carefully enough but I didn't see any explanation. > If you are: Feel free to discuss it here and/or write better proposals > to your liking (hint: can be based on this one). Present it to this list > and to FESCo. FESCo can cherry-pick the best one then. I don't think it is a good solution. It would be rejected, I prefer arguing even though it takes time, such that a compromise emerge, if possible, and trying not to repeat myself too often but respond to points. > BTW: Everything FESCo decides now can be reverted/modified later if that > should be needed and if there is interest from the community to change > something. We don't need to have the proper solution in the beginning. > But we have to start somewhere; and that's my goal atm. Indeed but if it is agreed that in maintainance state there is no updates only security fixes it would be quite hard to go back, as it may have irreversibly created users expectations. -- Pat From ed at eh3.com Fri Apr 28 15:44:58 2006 From: ed at eh3.com (Ed Hill) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 11:44:58 -0400 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428141248.1977f2df.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428141248.1977f2df.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1146239098.27208.205.camel@ernie> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 14:12 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > Time spent on trying to keep legacy branches alive is missing in other > areas. I'd rather see Extras packagers track Rawhide and prepare for the > next release of FC, so we have something to offer at the time of release > of Test1. Version upgrades in old branches--especially those which are > done without careful testing (like closed-eyes copy-to-branch-and-build > updates)--increase the risk of resulting in regression, dead-end breakage > and increased maintenance requirements. Such as but not limited to > requiring further version upgrades in build requirements or in > dependencies maintained by other packages (with Epoch bump or package > withdrawal as a worst-case). +1 Yes, there are opportunity costs and there certainly will be problems with adding new packages and/or new revisions to old releases. No doubt. IMNSHO, Fedora should be looking forward. Declaring old versions as _dead_ is a really _good_ thing! At some point we should let go and concentrate our limited time and effort on the present and future releases. Ed -- Edward H. Hill III, PhD office: MIT Dept. of EAPS; Rm 54-1424; 77 Massachusetts Ave. Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 emails: eh3 at mit.edu ed at eh3.com URLs: http://web.mit.edu/eh3/ http://eh3.com/ phone: 617-253-0098 fax: 617-253-4464 From ed at eh3.com Fri Apr 28 15:46:14 2006 From: ed at eh3.com (Ed Hill) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 11:46:14 -0400 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146226943.21190.40.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428114346.GA2315@free.fr> <1146226943.21190.40.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <1146239175.27208.207.camel@ernie> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 14:22 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Freitag, den 28.04.2006, 13:43 +0200 schrieb Patrice Dumas: > > > Doing both (e.g. 50% of the packagers update their packages to new > > > versions, the other 50% only fix bugs) is IMHO the worst we can do. If > > Why? [...] > > People from the outside look at Fedora Extras as a single entity. And > therefor we IMHO should maintain a consistent look-and-feel to > outsiders. The above is (IMHO) a important point that Patrice and others (again, IMHO) are either missing or choosing to ignore. There are a few thousand packages in FE and the number is growing (yea!!!) every week. No one -- *especially* users -- is going to have the time to determine which packages are being updated and which aren't. We ought (again, IMHO) to strive for some consistency. Expectations are a difficult enough thing to communicate. We don't and IMHO shouldn't try to make it any harder to understand. > > > > I completly disagree with that. If a user don't want new packages that > > > > entered extras while in maintainance state he shouldn't install new > > > > packages. In my opinion the maintainer could be able to add new packages > > > > for distributions in maintainance state, if he is confident that he > > > > will maintain it. [...] > > > I can live with that if others agree with it. But there were some people > > > in FESCo that don't like this idea. > > Why? [...] IMHO, a "maintenance mode" should have no new packages and should be a "cooling off" period that leads to a clear-cut EOL. In my mind, "EOL" means _dead_ -- the release has been honorably laid to rest. And thats a _good_ thing! I want to be free of bug reports from old versions. I want to be free to ignore them and focus my limited volunteer time on the present and future releases. "That release has reached EOL -- please see if the problem exists in current releases." The above should be a perfectly acceptable way to close bz tickets. And end users shouldn't be then arguing that some other ${XYZ} package is being updated on ${EOLed_RELEASE} and that therefor my packages should also be upgraded because there is some new problem or interaction or inconsistency... Ed -- Edward H. Hill III, PhD office: MIT Dept. of EAPS; Rm 54-1424; 77 Massachusetts Ave. Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 emails: eh3 at mit.edu ed at eh3.com URLs: http://web.mit.edu/eh3/ http://eh3.com/ phone: 617-253-0098 fax: 617-253-4464 From rc040203 at freenet.de Fri Apr 28 15:50:36 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 17:50:36 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428171225.a7adbf87.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428141248.1977f2df.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146227389.31774.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060428171225.a7adbf87.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1146239437.31774.294.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 17:12 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:29:49 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > Or to put it differently: I think you are mixing 2 completely > > independent issues: > > * Regular maintenance of "legacy" packages the "nominal maintainer" in > > current has abandoned to actively maintain. > > * Security response. > > Well, I tried to separate these two. But others didn't like the idea of > a "Fedora Extras Legacy Team" (= the combined set of Fedora Extras > Contributors who still support old legacy branches). Currently I still > don't _who_ would maintain old legacy packages, if not the Fedora Extras > Security Response Team. I think we are still talking pass each other. Let me try to give an (worst case) example of what I am talking about: "Maintainer" once submitted a package when FC3 was "devel", The package had been build for FC2, too. Meanwhile, FC5 is out, devel is future FC6. "Maintainer" has switched to actively using FC5 and therefore is not actively using Fedora < 5 anymore. He therefore releases upgrades for "FC5" and "devel", but skips anything older than FC4. Now he has a sudden accident sending him to hospital for 2 months - Nobody notices. Now, somebody (outside of Fedora) finds a severe exploit with this package, affecting all versions from FE2 through "devel". Questions: What will happen next, and who will perform which kind of action? First of all, somebody in Fedora will has got to know about this exploit. As you can't expect packagers to follow all potential security list, and given the fact security issues often a kept secret, getting to know about security issues isn't necessarily easy. Then, somebody will have to implement a fix, and to apply it. In some case, such fixes will be available from external sources, in some cases the packager will be able do develop a fix himself, but one can't rely on either of these possibilities. At this point the question of "Who does what?", i.e. coordination and responsibilities, comes into play. ATM, Legacy should fix FE2, the packager would fix FE5 and devel, may-be he would try to fix FE4 - FE3 would stay vulnerable. As he had an accident, probably nothing would happen, until somebody starts shouting loudly. Therefore, I say: We need a "Security Task force", monitoring security lists, assisting in providing fixes, taking actual action regardless of package ownership, when necessary. If one brings this thought to an end, you'll notice that the situation becomes even more difficult, when considering packagers outside of FE, such as Core or Legacy - In my opinion, it substantially questions this split. Ralf From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Apr 28 16:48:05 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 18:48:05 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146239437.31774.294.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428141248.1977f2df.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146227389.31774.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060428171225.a7adbf87.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146239437.31774.294.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20060428184805.898ed812.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 17:50:36 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 17:12 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:29:49 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > > > Or to put it differently: I think you are mixing 2 completely > > > independent issues: > > > * Regular maintenance of "legacy" packages the "nominal maintainer" in > > > current has abandoned to actively maintain. > > > * Security response. > > > > Well, I tried to separate these two. But others didn't like the idea of > > a "Fedora Extras Legacy Team" (= the combined set of Fedora Extras > > Contributors who still support old legacy branches). Currently I still > > don't _who_ would maintain old legacy packages, if not the Fedora Extras > > Security Response Team. > > I think we are still talking pass each other. I don't think so. ;) > Let me try to give an > (worst case) example of what I am talking about: > > "Maintainer" once submitted a package when FC3 was "devel", The package > had been build for FC2, too. Meanwhile, FC5 is out, devel is future FC6. > "Maintainer" has switched to actively using FC5 and therefore is not > actively using Fedora < 5 anymore. This is not a worst case, this is pretty normal. IMO. Scenario: "FC5 has just been released. Packager's primary machine is upgraded to FC5. FC4 is abandoned. FC3 even more." I'm aware that some packagers use mock to test-build their packages for older dists. I'm also aware that some use multi-boot environments or virtual machines to do run-time tests. But often, overall package quality suffers when package maintainers no longer use the old distributions regularly. > He therefore releases upgrades for "FC5" and "devel", but skips anything > older than FC4. Now he has a sudden accident sending him to hospital for > 2 months - Nobody notices. Which is what we've experienced several times before. Not in form of an accident, but packagers "dropping off" silently, leaving behind open bugzilla tickets and orphaned packages. > Now, somebody (outside of Fedora) finds a severe exploit with this > package, affecting all versions from FE2 through "devel". ... and submits a bug report which goes unnoticed unless some of us skim over all new reports (or at least try to, which is very difficult, since _old_ reports moved from one Product to another may be missed) and add these to the tracker bugs. > Questions: What will happen next, and who will perform which kind of > action? We needed policies, so either a) an official team inside Fedora Extras gets the power (= the privileges) to intervene, or b) arbitrary FE Contributors can intervene in accordance with policies. This is not just about security vulnerabilities. It can also happen that a critical bug in a popular package doesn't get fixed, because the package owner seems to be unavailable (or is known to be unavailable). > First of all, somebody in Fedora will has got to know about this > exploit. As you can't expect packagers to follow all potential security > list, and given the fact security issues often a kept secret, getting to > know about security issues isn't necessarily easy. > > Then, somebody will have to implement a fix, and to apply it. In some > case, such fixes will be available from external sources, in some cases > the packager will be able do develop a fix himself, but one can't rely > on either of these possibilities. > > At this point the question of "Who does what?", i.e. coordination and > responsibilities, comes into play. ATM, Legacy should fix FE2, the > packager would fix FE5 and devel, may-be he would try to fix FE4 - FE3 > would stay vulnerable. Yes, this is why this needs coordination and monitoring. Best performed by people who focus on these things. Instead of random contributors who notice a bug report and only fix "part of the mess". > As he had an accident, probably nothing would happen, until somebody > starts shouting loudly. > > Therefore, I say: We need a "Security Task force", monitoring security > lists, assisting in providing fixes, taking actual action regardless of > package ownership, when necessary. > > If one brings this thought to an end, you'll notice that the situation > becomes even more difficult, when considering packagers outside of FE, > such as Core or Legacy - In my opinion, it substantially questions this > split. Have you seen my earlier posting? (Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 11:31:33 +0200) No reply to it yet. From mpeters at mac.com Fri Apr 28 17:24:50 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 10:24:50 -0700 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428184805.898ed812.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428141248.1977f2df.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146227389.31774.250.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060428171225.a7adbf87.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146239437.31774.294.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20060428184805.898ed812.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1146245091.2456.42.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 18:48 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > This is not a worst case, this is pretty normal. IMO. Scenario: "FC5 has > just been released. Packager's primary machine is upgraded to FC5. FC4 is > abandoned. FC3 even more." I'm aware that some packagers use mock to > test-build their packages for older dists. I'm also aware that some use > multi-boot environments or virtual machines to do run-time tests. But > often, overall package quality suffers when package maintainers no longer > use the old distributions regularly. I know longer have an FC-3 box. I'll only request builds for FC-3 if I know it works there, or there is a bug and I know what fixes it. That actually bothers me a little - I need to move around some stuff and do an FC3 install. I don't have the time to do that probably until June. > > > We needed policies, so either > > a) an official team inside Fedora Extras gets the power (= the privileges) > to intervene, The person who sponsored the contributor at least has that authority if I correctly recall - but yes, some people should have the authority, at least with security patches, to intervene and apply them. For non security patches I think the standard pings to the developer and getting it listed as orphaned is the correct procedure. > > or > > b) arbitrary FE Contributors can intervene in accordance with > policies. I personally would rather have it be FE Contributors who have been given such authority. Such as specified members of the security team. Both for legacy and for "current". > > This is not just about security vulnerabilities. It can also happen that a > critical bug in a popular package doesn't get fixed, because the package > owner seems to be unavailable (or is known to be unavailable). In those cases, the package should be considered orphaned if the person doesn't respond. IMHO. From rdieter at math.unl.edu Fri Apr 28 17:33:08 2006 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:33:08 -0500 Subject: buildsystem stuck? Message-ID: Currently, 4 jobs taking 2+ hours are listed on http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/index.psp (Sorry, at least one of them is mine: maxima) -- Rex From mpeters at mac.com Fri Apr 28 20:09:44 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 13:09:44 -0700 Subject: buildsystem stuck? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1146254984.2456.76.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 12:33 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > Currently, 4 jobs taking 2+ hours are listed on > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/index.psp > > (Sorry, at least one of them is mine: maxima) > > -- Rex > Definitely looks stuck to me. From jkeating at redhat.com Fri Apr 28 20:14:41 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 16:14:41 -0400 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428075334.GB5957@neu.nirvana> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428075334.GB5957@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1146255281.13972.2.camel@ender> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 09:53 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > Currently there are five releases in maintenance mode, aka managed by > fedora legacy. Maybe in the future this will decrease, but somehow > whenever legacy tries to kick out a release some people start crying > and it is kept. But let's assume 3-4 releases on the average in the > future. Lets not assume that. I'm tired of hearing people cry, and releases will get dropped, and a strict adherence to the timeline will be met. It was a mistake of mine to ever extend the life beyond what we set forth. > > I also think that the organisational separation of core vs extras > blurs in legacy mode, as legacy for core is already in a community > driven entity like extras is, so convergence is easier in that > domain. legacy is a community security response team for core and > creating a second for extras doesn't sound right, it's better to > consolidate forces. Because we're in the process of moving our stuff over to Extras like land, so that we could possibly get folded into the Extras version of it, or it could all fall under our name, but for now a separate team is needed. Also if we ever get to the point where all of Fedora lives outside, then the core/extras line is really blurred and then we can really merge the teams. That said, I wouldn't be surprised to see Legacy folks in the Extras team (and hopefully vice versa). -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From jkeating at redhat.com Fri Apr 28 20:22:26 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 16:22:26 -0400 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> Message-ID: <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 12:20 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > I don't think this constraint is productive. As Axel said keeping > spec files synced is simpler most of the time for the packager. And > for > the users it depends, some want updates other don't. I would prefer > something along > > Maintainers are urged to consider that many users expect that only > severe bugfix or security fixes are fixed in maintainance state. > However > packagers may still update their packages if they find it more > convenient > or if they perceive that enough users want an update. > > This is fuzzy, but I think it is better that way. Because this leaves things fuzzy for end users. Some packages are updated, so why aren't all? It leaves things very ambiguous. We need to give users a clear message that "This release is in maintenance mode. Consider it deprecated. Please update." > > Branches for new packages in CVS are not created for Distributions > > that are in Maintenance state. FESCo can approve exceptions of this > rule > > if there are good reasons for it. The official package maintainers > are > > I completly disagree with that. If a user don't want new packages that > entered extras while in maintainance state he shouldn't install new > packages. In my opinion the maintainer could be able to add new > packages > for distributions in maintainance state, if he is confident that he > will maintain it. > > For me the only rule should be > > When creating branches for distributions that are in maintainance > state > the packager should understand that he is commiting to maintain > them. > > But it is the same for active distributions, and this commitment is > still > on a voluntary basis. Again, fuzzy message to end users. Why do some packages get released on these older releases, but not other packages? We need consistency. > > urged to fix their packages also for Distributions that are in > > Maintenance state. They should work hand in hand with the "Security > > Response Team" in case they don't have access to older > > distros anymore to test their updates. > > What about co-maintainership, if a maintainer volunteers for > maintaining > the old branches? > > > When the Fedora Project drops support for a Fedora Core release the > > corresponding Fedora Extras is also dropped -- read this as > > "End-of-life, no new updates,support for that EOL distro will be > removed > > from the Extras buildsys". > > Agreed. > > > The EOL Policy depends on the creation and a working Security > Response > > Team and especially the part of it that "will lend assistance as > needed" > > if the maintainer is unable to fix the package -- if that group does > not > > start working properly until June 15 2006 we'll send out a EOL for > > Fedora Extras 3 -- means: "Packagers can still update things in cvs > and > > build updates for now, but the official state of Fedora Extras 3 is > > 'unsupported and End of Life'". In that case we'll try to improve > for > > FE4 and later. > > What is the meaning of 'supported' for FE4 and FE5? I consider that > FE is unsupported (as in the no waarranty clause of free software > licences) > being a project based on volunteering. > > Anyway, beside all that I said above I think that, as long as the > infrastructure and the guideline are kept unchanged, I am all for > saying > Support is a reasonable expectation that bug reports will get looked at, security updates will be addressed, etc... -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From jkeating at redhat.com Fri Apr 28 20:23:41 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 16:23:41 -0400 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428114346.GA2315@free.fr> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428114346.GA2315@free.fr> Message-ID: <1146255821.13972.9.camel@ender> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 13:43 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > Maybe, but in a project based on voluntary work from packagers, > putting > constraint on them is likely to decrease their reactivness, and in > turn > it will harm the users. Otherwise said, if the "no updates" policy has > for consequence "Backporting is too much work, I won't bother for > that > EOL FE branch, let the security SIG do the backport if they want to", > it > is not a win for the user in my opinion. Policy doesn't say you can't use a version upgrade to resolve a security issue, as long as that is the motivation of the version upgrade. Package updates/upgrades just for the sake of the update/upgrade is what should be avoided. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Fri Apr 28 20:27:17 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 22:27:17 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428120415.GC2315@free.fr> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146073019.8655.12.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060426215759.GA5454@free.fr> <12082.192.54.193.51.1146138622.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060428120415.GC2315@free.fr> Message-ID: <1146256040.882.11.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le vendredi 28 avril 2006 ? 14:04 +0200, Patrice Dumas a ?crit : > > 2. upstream is dead or has decided to switch to another preferred > > version/something else > > Upstream is dead is not relevant. Some usefull but stable apps have no > upstream and that's not an issue. For an example there is asa, a package > that convert fortran carriage control characters I maintain which has > no upstream, but don't need one. So in the Fedora sense you're the upstream. I'm talking of the case where : 1. there is no upstream 2. the packager can not substitute itself to upstream (to adapt to gcc changes, vuln alerts, etc) ... > I personally think that it is acceptable and shouldn't be a reason not > to ship those programs I didn't propose to stop shipping them, but putting them in a separate Fedora repo to highlight the fact the level of support/testing/fixing which can be expected is way lower than that of main FE repo itself. It's way better to have a gray repo rather than putting black sheep in the main repo just because some packagers find them too convenient to drop (and are ready to accept the convenience/security compromise a uninformed user may not find so cool) > > 4. (for a lib) nothing depends on it in the repo, so there's no one to > > check it actually works > > But a lib may be usefull in itself! If the lib is useful then there should be at least one packageable user. If *no* lib user can be packaged : 1. then it may not be so useful after all 2. or it's only used by unpackageable stuff, in which case I don't see why it should be packaged when its users aren't Also it's going to be loads of fun when users report problems with the lib and there are no users in the repo to test it against/reproduce the problem > > 5. (for a lib) almost nothing depends on it, and the few remaining users > > are scheduled to switch in the next month > > In that case the maintainer should be smart enough to avoid propagating > the lib to devel and to the following fedora version. If it's that obvious to you I don't see what's wrong in writing it. Consensus - yep > > 6. (for an app) depends on a lib/susbsystem which falls under the previous > > rules > > Agreed, in the sense that apps depends on orphaned libs should be considered > as also in a kind of orphaned state. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e URL: From wtogami at redhat.com Fri Apr 28 20:54:01 2006 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 16:54:01 -0400 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <445280E9.3000405@redhat.com> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >>> Branches for new packages in CVS are not created for Distributions >>> that are in Maintenance state. FESCo can approve exceptions of this rule >>> if there are good reasons for it. The official package maintainers are >> I completly disagree with that. If a user don't want new packages that >> entered extras while in maintainance state he shouldn't install new >> packages. In my opinion the maintainer could be able to add new packages >> for distributions in maintainance state, if he is confident that he >> will maintain it. [...] > > I can live with that if others agree with it. But there were some people > in FESCo that don't like this idea. > If the package maintainer fails, then that just becomes yet another reason to retire the distro as it pulls the statistics down. I can almost support this idea, except I think we should discourage adding new things. There shouldn't be a wide open door for branching to FC-3. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From mpeters at mac.com Fri Apr 28 20:56:11 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 13:56:11 -0700 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <1146256040.882.11.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146073019.8655.12.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060426215759.GA5454@free.fr> <12082.192.54.193.51.1146138622.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060428120415.GC2315@free.fr> <1146256040.882.11.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <1146257771.2456.93.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 22:27 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > I didn't propose to stop shipping them, but putting them in a separate > Fedora repo to highlight the fact the level of support/testing/fixing > which can be expected is way lower than that of main FE repo itself. Some maintainers may do a better job at maintaining a package with no active upstream than some packagers can with an active upstream. > > But a lib may be usefull in itself! > > If the lib is useful then there should be at least one packageable user. Some libraries are not intended to be used in end user applications, but are intended to be used by users writing programs to solve a specific problem - such as in the sciences, where they sometimes write programs specifically to deal with the experiment they are doing. > If *no* lib user can be packaged : > 1. then it may not be so useful after all > 2. or it's only used by unpackageable stuff, in which case I don't see > why it should be packaged when its users aren't It may be of value to third party repositories, or to end users who want to install foo.rpm they downloaded off the net, or want to build something from source. If someone wants to maintain it, then it doesn't matter if an extras package currently uses it. A library is no different from a perl module. Some perl modules are provided not because packaged perl applications need them, but because people who use perl on their system need them. If a library doesn't have a package that uses it - there very well may be people who write compiled programs on their local system that use want them. > > Also it's going to be loads of fun when users report problems with the > lib and there are no users in the repo to test it against/reproduce the > problem The user should be able to specify what software they are using that has a problem with the lib. Very often the devel packages have sample code that can be used to test. A maintainer shouldn't submit a package that they are not able in some way to test. > > > > 5. (for a lib) almost nothing depends on it, and the few remaining users > > > are scheduled to switch in the next month > > > > In that case the maintainer should be smart enough to avoid propagating > > the lib to devel and to the following fedora version. If the maintainer is willing to maintain it, it should go into the next version for compatibility reasons. Backwards compatibility makes it easier for people to run the latest version of Fedora - reducing the number of people who _need_ to run legacy versions of Fedora to use Linux for what they need to get accomplished. From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 28 21:26:10 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 23:26:10 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <1146256040.882.11.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146073019.8655.12.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060426215759.GA5454@free.fr> <12082.192.54.193.51.1146138622.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060428120415.GC2315@free.fr> <1146256040.882.11.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20060428212610.GA2668@free.fr> > > I personally think that it is acceptable and shouldn't be a reason not > > to ship those programs > > I didn't propose to stop shipping them, but putting them in a separate > Fedora repo to highlight the fact the level of support/testing/fixing > which can be expected is way lower than that of main FE repo itself. Ok, why not if it's not complicated and don't add trouble, but I think that packager should not be forced to put them in (orphans could go in 'automatically'). > It's way better to have a gray repo rather than putting black sheep in > the main repo just because some packagers find them too convenient to > drop (and are ready to accept the convenience/security compromise a > uninformed user may not find so cool) Ok. > If the lib is useful then there should be at least one packageable user. > If *no* lib user can be packaged : > 1. then it may not be so useful after all > 2. or it's only used by unpackageable stuff, in which case I don't see > why it should be packaged when its users aren't Once more I'll take the example of the cernlib. In the cernlib there are many usefull math subroutines that may be used in numerical models, though I doubt anything will ever depend on the cernlib. I doubt a model will ever go in fedora... There is no general case, however, and I am not against arguing your point for a particular lib. > Also it's going to be loads of fun when users report problems with the > lib and there are no users in the repo to test it against/reproduce the > problem Not to worry about. If a user wants to reproduce something he will provide the code. > If it's that obvious to you I don't see what's wrong in writing it. > Consensus - yep Ok for that one... But that makes 3 out of 6... -- Pat From michael at knox.net.nz Fri Apr 28 21:44:41 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 09:44:41 +1200 Subject: packaging java apps Message-ID: <44528CC9.2030002@knox.net.nz> Hey all, I am wondering if there is some guide lines one should follow when packaging up a java app? I am working on doctorj (which works) but I want to make sure that it's correctly packaged. Thanks Michael From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 28 21:49:57 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 23:49:57 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146239175.27208.207.camel@ernie> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146221427.21190.14.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428114346.GA2315@free.fr> <1146226943.21190.40.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <1146239175.27208.207.camel@ernie> Message-ID: <20060428214957.GB2668@free.fr> > > People from the outside look at Fedora Extras as a single entity. And > > therefor we IMHO should maintain a consistent look-and-feel to > > outsiders. > > The above is (IMHO) a important point that Patrice and others (again, > IMHO) are either missing or choosing to ignore. There are a few I am not ignoring it. But I consider that it is impossible, given the span of use and package styles. I personnaly maintain packages that are very different, used by different users and more importantly in different contexts. Am I the only one in that case? To be more precise I maintain oldish science/fortran stuff that in my opinion should be maintained and updated even in EOL feodra, document processing stuff that could be updated for eol versions if users ask for it and chm related stuff that I would prefer not to maintain for EOL fedora. That's my expectations and I believe they make sense, maybe I'm wrong. > thousand packages in FE and the number is growing (yea!!!) every week. > No one -- *especially* users -- is going to have the time to determine > which packages are being updated and which aren't. We ought (again, They don't have to. They should rely on the maintainer choice, and communicate if they are unhappy. > IMHO) to strive for some consistency. > > Expectations are a difficult enough thing to communicate. We don't and > IMHO shouldn't try to make it any harder to understand. In my opinion it is better to have inconsistencies than prevent maintainer to package things in a relevant way. I am not saying that there shouldn't be a general recommendation to avoid breaking stuff in EOL version and so don't systematically update in EOL versions, but it should be flexible to account for all the use cases. Similarly in devel it is nice to experiment and break stuff, but it is not a requirement... > IMHO, a "maintenance mode" should have no new packages and should be a > "cooling off" period that leads to a clear-cut EOL. In my mind, "EOL" > means _dead_ -- the release has been honorably laid to rest. And thats > a _good_ thing! I want to be free of bug reports from old versions. I > want to be free to ignore them and focus my limited volunteer time on > the present and future releases. You want that. But why do you want to bind others to do the same? > "That release has reached EOL -- please see if the problem exists > in current releases." > > The above should be a perfectly acceptable way to close bz tickets. And I have never argued against that. I just say that a maintainer could be able to chose that (update please) and another could be able to care about those reports. > end users shouldn't be then arguing that some other ${XYZ} package is > being updated on ${EOLed_RELEASE} and that therefor my packages should > also be upgraded because there is some new problem or interaction or > inconsistency... They could be arguing but then you would have to point them to the guideline saying that they have to follow your choice. You could also ask them to be co-maintainers and maintain the packages for this branch, if you feel you don't care about them, or, if you think they should be kept frozen you could just say that. You are the maintainer. -- Pat From pertusus at free.fr Fri Apr 28 22:06:57 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 00:06:57 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> Message-ID: <20060428220657.GC2668@free.fr> > Because this leaves things fuzzy for end users. Some packages are > updated, so why aren't all? It leaves things very ambiguous. We need > to give users a clear message that "This release is in maintenance mode. > Consider it deprecated. Please update." I don't argue against that. I think that's what should be advertized. But does it hurt if we also say that "some packages may still be updated if the maintainer is willing". > Again, fuzzy message to end users. Why do some packages get released on > these older releases, but not other packages? We need consistency. Again I don't thinwe need absolute consistency. We could say "The general case is that new packages are not released for the old releases, but it is possible if the maintainer wants to.". > > infrastructure and the guideline are kept unchanged, I am all for > > saying > > > > Support is a reasonable expectation that bug reports will get looked at, > security updates will be addressed, etc... I don't really understand your point, but I think that a maintainer should not be prevented to support any release if he wants to. -- Pat From dominik at greysector.net Fri Apr 28 22:43:51 2006 From: dominik at greysector.net (Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 00:43:51 +0200 Subject: packaging java apps In-Reply-To: <44528CC9.2030002@knox.net.nz> References: <44528CC9.2030002@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <20060428224351.GB7859@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> On Friday, 28 April 2006 at 23:44, Michael J Knox wrote: > Hey all, > > I am wondering if there is some guide lines one should follow when > packaging up a java app? > > I am working on doctorj (which works) but I want to make sure that it's > correctly packaged. JPackage.org-like packaging seems to be the preferred way here. Regards, R. -- MPlayer developer and RPMs maintainer: http://rpm.greysector.net/mplayer/ There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and oppression to develop psychic muscles. -- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan From dcbw at redhat.com Sat Apr 29 01:55:38 2006 From: dcbw at redhat.com (Dan Williams) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 21:55:38 -0400 Subject: buildsystem stuck? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1146275738.3695.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 12:33 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > Currently, 4 jobs taking 2+ hours are listed on > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/index.psp > > (Sorry, at least one of them is mine: maxima) Kicked, and the traceback worked around. I've mailed people whose builds didn't get into the database to requeue the jobs, but if you're unsure if your job got in, please requeue it. Dan From rc040203 at freenet.de Sat Apr 29 03:17:04 2006 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 05:17:04 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146255281.13972.2.camel@ender> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428075334.GB5957@neu.nirvana> <1146255281.13972.2.camel@ender> Message-ID: <1146280624.31774.309.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 16:14 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 09:53 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > Currently there are five releases in maintenance mode, aka managed by > > fedora legacy. Maybe in the future this will decrease, but somehow > > whenever legacy tries to kick out a release some people start crying > > and it is kept. But let's assume 3-4 releases on the average in the > > future. > > Lets not assume that. I'm tired of hearing people cry, and releases > will get dropped, and a strict adherence to the timeline will be met. > It was a mistake of mine to ever extend the life beyond what we set > forth. Sorry, but I beg to differ: IMO, * wanting to discontinue FC(N-1) at FC(N+1)test2 is a fault, because it doesn't provide a sufficient overlap to FC(N+1), for users wanting to upgrade from FC(N-1) to FC(N+1) [e.g. FC3->FC5]. * disabling maintainers from providing bugfixes for FE < N-1 by shutting down the build system would be a fault. I.e. IMO, NOW (FC5+xxx weeks) is the time to officially announce FC3 into "bug-fix-only maintenance" but to keep the buildsystem for FE3 up for quite some time. When to shut this down, is a different question (c.f. Security Team thread). Ralf From jkeating at redhat.com Sat Apr 29 06:16:17 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 02:16:17 -0400 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146280624.31774.309.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428075334.GB5957@neu.nirvana> <1146255281.13972.2.camel@ender> <1146280624.31774.309.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1146291377.13972.21.camel@ender> On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 05:17 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > * wanting to discontinue FC(N-1) at FC(N+1)test2 is a fault, because > it > doesn't provide a sufficient overlap to FC(N+1), for users wanting to > upgrade from FC(N-1) to FC(N+1) [e.g. FC3->FC5]. /me tries to wrap his head around what you're saying.... We're not dropping 3. When 4 comes to Legacy, we'll drop 1 and 2, leave 3 and 4. When 5 comes into legacy, we'll drop 3, keep 4 and 5. > * disabling maintainers from providing bugfixes for FE < N-1 by > shutting > down the build system would be a fault. That would be N - 2. > I.e. IMO, NOW (FC5+xxx weeks) is the time to officially announce FC3 > into "bug-fix-only maintenance" but to keep the buildsystem for FE3 up > for quite some time. When to shut this down, is a different question > (c.f. Security Team thread). > Changing when a Fedora release goes into Maint mode is a discussion for the Fedora board and such. I don't see this as a good idea. Making extras follow a different time line is also not that great of an idea IMHO. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From jkeating at redhat.com Sat Apr 29 06:18:42 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 02:18:42 -0400 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428220657.GC2668@free.fr> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> <20060428220657.GC2668@free.fr> Message-ID: <1146291523.13972.24.camel@ender> On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 00:06 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > I don't argue against that. I think that's what should be advertized. > But does it hurt if we also say that "some packages may still be > updated if > the maintainer is willing". Again, inconsistent. That's a bad message to end users. "Are packages still supported? Well, that depends on the package...." ugly. > > Again, fuzzy message to end users. Why do some packages get > released on > > these older releases, but not other packages? We need consistency. > > Again I don't thinwe need absolute consistency. We could say "The > general > case is that new packages are not released for the old releases, but > it > is possible if the maintainer wants to.". Thats, fine, we can disagree. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 29 07:18:14 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 09:18:14 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060428143335.GB2317@free.fr> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <20060428143335.GB2317@free.fr> Message-ID: <20060429091814.46a58346.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 16:33:35 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > build infrastructure -- the whole point of maintenance mode is to reduce > > the amount of infrastructure work needed to keep Fedora going to something > > manageable with the amount of resources Fedora has. > > Not doing anything special for maintenance branches is the better way to > reduce the amount of infrastructure work needed to keep Fedora going. > I don't think the load on the buildsys is relevant here, at least it is > not my impression. For the disk space and bandwidth I don't know. The resource requirements would grow, because the legacy repository would still grow, and its total maintenance requirements would increase. And who knows how long after the corresponding FC release entered legacy mode a FE packager might start adding new packages to the branch? I don't care whether FE packagers backport security fixes or whether they fix them with version upgrades. Sometimes backports would not be feasible without much effort. And sometimes a version upgrade would be a big version jump, when upstream uses a discovered defect as an opportunity to push out a new major release. In that case, version upgrades in legacy branches could not be avoided even if they introduce new risks. But adding entirely NEW packages to FE when FC is locked in legacy maintenance mode, is an inconsistency I feel that is bad. Not only does it create an inconsistency, it creates chaos in some areas as users don't know what they can expect (think bug reports "version 1.1.2 is out, please upgrade"). Reading again and again that users should rely on packagers to do the right thing, this enters the old loop of asking: What do we aim at anyway? It would be a promise that we believe the packagers do the right thing. It's not individuals who promise something, it's the entire FE project which makes the promise. And when we do that, users should also be able to rely on the project to maintain the full set of packages when a packager doesn't respond [in time] or when a package is officially orphaned. This brings us back to a security response team of volunteers. It simply doesn't work to let some packagers extend a legacy branch with new packages when that might result in increased maintenance requirements for the rest of the project either immediately or some time later. From seg at haxxed.com Sat Apr 29 07:49:54 2006 From: seg at haxxed.com (Callum Lerwick) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 02:49:54 -0500 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> Message-ID: <1146296995.7621.211.camel@localhost.localdomain> I'm for taking a hard line on EOL. No new packages, not even upgrades. Backported security fixes only. Its called EOL for a reason. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 29 08:07:10 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:07:10 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <1146256040.882.11.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146073019.8655.12.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060426215759.GA5454@free.fr> <12082.192.54.193.51.1146138622.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060428120415.GC2315@free.fr> <1146256040.882.11.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <44531EAE.4060200@hhs.nl> Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > It's way better to have a gray repo rather than putting black sheep in > the main repo just because some packagers find them too convenient to > drop (and are ready to accept the convenience/security compromise a > uninformed user may not find so cool) > I disagree, one one side we already have to much repos as is, and on the other side some repos (the repo that should not be named) really need a a split, currently the repo that should not be named contains anything thats non free one way or the other. But most of that stuff is fine in the US and could / should be on a repo for which we can advertise. I would like to see the following FE-guidelines following repos (All non free without the Fedora name, but still in accordance with all the other FE-guidelines): -Fedora Core -Fedora Extras -XXX Non commercial use (otherwise 100% free) -XXX patent encumbered (aka non US) -XXX Non free Currently all XXX stuff is on the repo which should not be named whcih is not a good thing. If we also create supported and semi supported versions of repo's you all of a sudden have made a one dimensional problem 2 dimensional which is a bad idea. Either a package meets our quality standards or it doesn't its really that simple. Regards, Hans From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 29 08:16:50 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 04:16:50 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 3 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060429081650.3D221152160@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 3: 10 conserver-8.1.14-2.fc3 dnsmasq-2.30-2.fc3.3 dnsmasq-2.30-3.fc3 git-1.3.1-1.fc3 libsigsegv-2.3-1.fc3 metapixel-1.0.1-2.fc3 perl-PBS-0.31-1.fc3 rpy-0.4.6-10.fc3 sbcl-0.9.12-1.fc3 torque-2.1.0p0-0.11.200604251602cvs.fc3 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 29 08:17:45 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 04:17:45 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 4 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060429081745.B77D9152160@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 4: 36 abcm2ps-4.12.15-1.fc4 amarok-1.3.9-1.fc4 conserver-8.1.14-2.fc4 cpanspec-1.65-1.fc4 dnsmasq-2.30-3.fc4 doctorj-5.0.0-2.fc4 gnome-password-generator-1.4-4.fc4 gnome-themes-extras-0.9.0-2.fc4 gurlchecker-0.8.3-4.fc4 ices-2.0.1-2.fc4 kbibtex-0.1.4-1.fc4 libsigsegv-2.3-1.fc4 maxima-5.9.3-2.fc4 maxima-5.9.3-3.fc4 metapixel-1.0.1-2.fc4 perl-Crypt-Blowfish-2.10-1.fc4 perl-Error-0.15009-1.fc4 perl-Log-Dispatch-FileRotate-1.15-1.fc4 perl-PBS-0.31-1.fc4 pygame-1.7.1-5.fc4 python-lxml-0.9.1-3.fc4 rman-3.2-3.fc4 rpy-0.4.6-10.fc4 rpy-0.4.6-9.fc4 sbcl-0.9.12-1.fc4 sbcl-0.9.12-1.fc4.1 sbcl-0.9.12-2.fc4 ser-0.9.6-6.fc4 tetex-dvipost-1.1-4.fc4 torque-2.1.0p0-0.11.200604251602cvs.fc4 xfce4-battery-plugin-0.3.0-5.fc4 xfce4-clipman-plugin-0.4.1-5.fc4 xfce4-notes-plugin-0.11.1-3.fc4 xfce4-quicklauncher-plugin-0.81-3.fc4 xfce4-sensors-plugin-0.7.0-4.fc4 xmms-scrobbler-0.3.8-1.fc4 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 29 08:18:32 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 04:18:32 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras 5 Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060429081832.72259152160@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras 5: 36 Glide3-20050815-4.fc5 abcm2ps-4.12.15-1.fc5 alltray-0.66-1.fc5 conserver-8.1.14-2.fc5 cpanspec-1.65-1.fc5 dnsmasq-2.30-3.fc5 doctorj-5.0.0-2.fc5 gnome-password-generator-1.4-4.fc5 gnome-themes-extras-0.9.0-2.fc5 gnonlin-0.10.0.5-6 gtkhtml36-3.6.2-4.fc5 gurlchecker-0.8.3-4.fc5 kbibtex-0.1.4-1.fc5 lft-2.5-3.fc5 libsigsegv-2.3-1.fc5 maxima-5.9.3-2.fc5 maxima-5.9.3-3.fc5 metapixel-1.0.1-2.fc5 muse-3.02.6b-4.fc5 numpy-0.9.6-1.fc5 perl-Cairo-0.03-2.fc5 perl-Crypt-Blowfish-2.10-1.fc5 perl-Error-0.15009-1.fc5 perl-Log-Dispatch-FileRotate-1.15-1.fc5 perl-PBS-0.31-1.fc5 pygame-1.7.1-5.fc5 python-lxml-0.9.1-3.fc5 rpy-0.4.6-10.fc5 rpy-0.4.6-9.fc5 sbcl-0.9.12-1.fc5 sbcl-0.9.12-1.fc5.1 sbcl-0.9.12-2.fc5 ser-0.9.6-6.fc5 tetex-dvipost-1.1-4.fc5 torque-2.1.0p0-0.11.200604251602cvs.fc5 xmms-scrobbler-0.3.8-1.fc5 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Apr 29 08:19:48 2006 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 04:19:48 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Extras development Package Build Report Message-ID: <20060429081948.43443152160@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> Packages built and released for Fedora Extras development: 51 Glide3-20050815-4.fc6 abcm2ps-4.12.15-1.fc6 alltray-0.66-1.fc6 conserver-8.1.14-2.fc6 contacts-0.1-1 cpanspec-1.65-1.fc6 dnsmasq-2.30-3.fc6 doctorj-5.0.0-1.fc6 doctorj-5.0.0-2.fc6 fedora-usermgmt-0.8.90-2.fc6 gnome-password-generator-1.4-4.fc6 gnome-themes-extras-0.9.0-1.fc6 gnome-themes-extras-0.9.0-2.fc6 gnonlin-0.10.3-2 gnucap-0.34-2.fc6 gtkhtml36-3.6.2-4.fc6 gurlchecker-0.8.3-4.fc6 kbibtex-0.1.4-1.fc6 lft-2.5-3.fc6 libsigsegv-2.3-1.fc6 maxima-5.9.3-2.fc6 maxima-5.9.3-2.fc6.1 metapixel-1.0.1-2.fc6 mftrace-1.1.19-3.fc6 numpy-0.9.6-1.fc6 openct-0.6.7-0.1.rc4.fc6 opensc-0.11.0-0.1.rc2.fc6 perl-Crypt-Blowfish-2.10-1.fc6 perl-DBM-Deep-0.983-1.fc6 perl-Email-Address-1.80-1.fc6 perl-Email-MessageID-1.31-1.fc6 perl-Email-Simple-1.92-1.fc6 perl-Error-0.15009-1.fc6 perl-HTTP-Proxy-0.19-1.fc6 perl-Log-Dispatch-FileRotate-1.15-1.fc6 proftpd-1.3.0-2.fc6 pygame-1.7.1-6.fc6 python-lxml-0.9.1-3.fc6 python-nose-0.8.7.2-1.fc6 raptor-1.4.8-5.fc6 rman-3.2-3.fc6 rpy-0.4.6-10.fc6 sbcl-0.9.12-1.fc6 sbcl-0.9.12-1.fc6.1 sbcl-0.9.12-2.fc6 ser-0.9.6-6.fc6 tetex-dvipost-1.1-4.fc6 torque-2.1.0p0-0.11.200604251602cvs.fc6 wings-0.98.32b-5.fc6 xmms-scrobbler-0.3.6-2.fc6 xmms-scrobbler-0.3.8-1.fc6 For more information about the built packages please see the repository or the fedora Info Feed: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/ From dan at danny.cz Sat Apr 29 08:47:13 2006 From: dan at danny.cz (Dan =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hor=E1k?=) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:47:13 +0200 Subject: buildsystem stuck? In-Reply-To: <1146275738.3695.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1146275738.3695.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1146300433.3523.2.camel@eagle.danny.cz> Dan Williams p??e v P? 28. 04. 2006 v 21:55 -0400: > On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 12:33 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > > Currently, 4 jobs taking 2+ hours are listed on > > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/index.psp > > > > (Sorry, at least one of them is mine: maxima) > > Kicked, and the traceback worked around. I've mailed people whose > builds didn't get into the database to requeue the jobs, but if you're > unsure if your job got in, please requeue it. I think the build system is stuck again (or yet) on maxima. Dan From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sat Apr 29 08:48:15 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:48:15 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146280624.31774.309.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428075334.GB5957@neu.nirvana> <1146255281.13972.2.camel@ender> <1146280624.31774.309.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1146300497.882.20.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le samedi 29 avril 2006 ? 05:17 +0200, Ralf Corsepius a ?crit : > Sorry, but I beg to differ: > > IMO, > * wanting to discontinue FC(N-1) at FC(N+1)test2 is a fault, because it > doesn't provide a sufficient overlap to FC(N+1), for users wanting to > upgrade from FC(N-1) to FC(N+1) [e.g. FC3->FC5]. Which is intentional on the FC side and I don't see why FE should be any better. You know perfectly well the FC EOL is not designed to allow FC(N-1) to FC(N+1). I say keep FE proper in line with FC, which includes same EOL *and* same initial availability. It's all too easy to start trailing for one release, then two, then so much no one really knows when support starts and stops Get a Legacy-style group for FE, and if they want to do long-term maintenance for years much power to them, but here you're trying to force on volunteers conditions paid contributors to Fedora (@rh, FC) already said no to. Since the EOL was never defined before, the *only* moral contract current contributors have with FE is to do something "like FC", which has very clear EOL policies (and not the one you advocate) -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e URL: From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Sat Apr 29 08:52:27 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:52:27 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> Message-ID: <20060429085227.GC10223@neu.nirvana> On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 04:22:26PM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 12:20 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > I don't think this constraint is productive. As Axel said keeping > > spec files synced is simpler most of the time for the > > packager. And for the users it depends, some want updates other > > don't. I would prefer something along > > > > Maintainers are urged to consider that many users expect that > > only severe bugfix or security fixes are fixed in maintainance > > state. However packagers may still update their packages if > > they find it more convenient or if they perceive that enough > > users want an update. > > > > This is fuzzy, but I think it is better that way. > > Because this leaves things fuzzy for end users. Some packages are > updated, so why aren't all? It leaves things very ambiguous. We need > to give users a clear message that "This release is in maintenance mode. > Consider it deprecated. Please update." How about a compromise? Externally (toward the users) the official position is that there is no official support (*) anymore other than security fixes, while packagers are still allowed to update legacied' releases at their own discretion w/o having to go through loops? (*) support != SLAs/warranty -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sat Apr 29 09:13:53 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 11:13:53 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <44531EAE.4060200@hhs.nl> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146073019.8655.12.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060426215759.GA5454@free.fr> <12082.192.54.193.51.1146138622.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060428120415.GC2315@free.fr> <1146256040.882.11.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <44531EAE.4060200@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1146302036.882.44.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le samedi 29 avril 2006 ? 10:07 +0200, Hans de Goede a ?crit : > > Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > > > It's way better to have a gray repo rather than putting black sheep in > > the main repo just because some packagers find them too convenient to > > drop (and are ready to accept the convenience/security compromise a > > uninformed user may not find so cool) > > > > I disagree, one one side we already have to much repos as is Well, to be blunt you really have three choices : 1. split FE in high and low-level of support packages (low-level being what I defined before more or less), putting low-level in a gray repo 2. raise the bar and remove from FE everything which would have fallen into the gray repo 3. continue to accept in FE everything which is FOSS and legal as long as one packager is interested enough to do the initial submission In 1. and 2. users can have a clear view on FE quality (1. is pretty much what FC does wrt FE, 2. what RHL/FC did before FE existed) In 3. FE can contain pretty much everything from the best to the worse, which is frankly frightening from a user POW, especially since as time passes, the repo grows, contributing procedures get refined and easier to follow, the proportion of questionable material will form a bigger and bigger part of FE. Let's face it, failed or struggling projects on sf vastly outnumber successful ones (as the compat lib number vastly outnumbers the current lib number), well known solid software gets packaged first and then comes the time of gray packaging. If you keep everything in a single repo well at some point users will judge it too dangerous to import in yum directly, will cherry pick packages manually instead, and things will go downhill. Which has been known to happen to other repo that put convenience a little too high on their priorities. When people submit packages that would be rejected by the vast majority of FE users, ask for packaging guidelines exemptions, all because some small minority is ready to accept the packaging compromises, I'd rather have their package put in a grey repo rather than have a yes/no black-and-white choice like right now. Ditto for packages on their way to orphaning no one really knows how to treat (because a maintainer may still materialise, even though the package has been in dereliction for months). Or stuff which is useless alone but does not have the remaining bits in the repo. -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e URL: From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sat Apr 29 09:18:35 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 11:18:35 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060429085227.GC10223@neu.nirvana> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> <20060429085227.GC10223@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1146302318.882.48.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le samedi 29 avril 2006 ? 10:52 +0200, Axel Thimm a ?crit : > How about a compromise? Externally (toward the users) the official > position is that there is no official support (*) anymore other than > security fixes, while packagers are still allowed to update legacied' > releases at their own discretion w/o having to go through loops? If we do that I'll ask for the updates to be vetoed if the packager is not up-to-date with any of its packages in devel. Simply to ensure no one can try to bypass FE priorities -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e URL: From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 29 09:26:57 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 11:26:57 +0200 Subject: i386 binaries in the x86_64 directories In-Reply-To: <1146001828.21102.17.camel@T7.Linux> References: <1145981019.15643.10.camel@mrwibble.mrwobble> <444E49EB.7040003@city-fan.org> <1146001828.21102.17.camel@T7.Linux> Message-ID: <20060429112657.64117c43.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 22:50:28 +0100, Paul wrote: > Hi, > > > > The problem is this. When you compile mono from source, if you say > > > --libdir=/usr/lib64, everything goes into /usr/lib64 happily and the .pc > > > files go into /usr/lib64/pkgconfig. However, when compiling via a spec > > > file, even if you define libdir as /usr/lib, bits move > > > to /usr/lib64/pkgconfig and it doesn't matter what is passed in the % > > > configure line. Then that is a packaging bug. > > What are the Makefile lines responsible for installing the misplaced > > files? Perhaps there's a make macro you can set to put them in the right > > place? > > The problem is that the configure file is picking up the packages from > whereever their .pc files are. For example, gtksourceview-sharp picks up > gtksharp. gtksharp has it's pc file in /usr/lib irrespective of the > architecture (as /usr/lib/pkgconfig/../..). The paths looks to be taken > relative to where it finds the pkgconfig files. Then that is a packaging bug, too. Or broken by design. > Problem comes if you're using a 64 bit machine. The .pc files end up > in /usr/lib64 as that's where pkgconfig says to put things. However, the > package expects things to be in /usr/lib/pkgconfig > > Is there a way to override pkgconfig so that it always goes > to /usr/lib/pkgconfig. Failing that, my finding here supports my bug > report that mono is packaged incorrectly for x86_64. At run-time? You could override $PKG_CONFIG_PATH and insert /usr/lib/pkgconfig at the beginning, but that would only work around more fundamental problems. From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 29 09:34:35 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 11:34:35 +0200 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <1145995007.27459.6.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> <1145967763.3806.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> <444E6E3E.7080402@knox.net.nz> <1145995007.27459.6.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> Message-ID: <20060429113435.9cbc54e6.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:56:47 -0400, Brian Pepple wrote: [Sodipodi] > Well, the projects last release was in February of 2004, and all bug > reports for the last year or so have been unanswered by Lauris. Also, > CVS appears not to have been touched for ages. Here's Lauris last > message on the mailing list from back in March 2005: > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=6795136&forum_id=3970 > > In my book, I would consider it not being actively developed. A co-maintainers's message is in the same thread, btw: | I can"t admin the project after all | | Back in January, Lauris made me an admin so that we would have someone | other than himself to approve checkins. I wanted to revitalize | Sodipodi, do cool stuff, etc. But first I had to meet this work deadline. | | Well. Now that that"s done, six weeks later, I need to admit that I"ve | changed my mind. There are two reasons here. The first is that I got | handed another, higher-priority responsibility, and probably won"t have | time for Sodipodi. The second is that I finally got around to taking a | look at Inkscape, and, frankly, it"s so much further ahead that I don"t | see much point in continuing to work on Sodipodi. Anybody have a | counterargument? From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 29 09:40:30 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 11:40:30 +0200 Subject: compat packages In-Reply-To: <1145991004.6969.40.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> References: <1145986454.6969.34.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> <1145990228.14151.3.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <1145991004.6969.40.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> Message-ID: <20060429114030.e2d31742.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 11:50:04 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote: > On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 19:37 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > > > > > I think Extras is exactly the right place for them actually. They're not > > "Core" but many people would find them useful to have available. I still > > get lots of hits on the libcurl7112 package (for libcurl.so.2) in my > > personal repo, which might be a useful addition to Extras. > > > > Not sure about having devel subpackages of compat libraries though. > > If it uses pkgconfig - there shouldn't be any problem of header file > confusion between different versions. > > In some cases (libshout 1 vs 2) there is conflict in the devel packages > that would have to be carefully worked around, but with packages that > use pkgconfig - that shouldn't really be an issue. Is this true? pkg-config uses an own package namespace for all its template files. An application looking for gtkhtml-2{.pc} would not find gtkhtml-3{.pc} and vice versa. And two different -devel packages using the same file name for a pkgconfig file would conflict. From dan at danny.cz Sat Apr 29 09:42:46 2006 From: dan at danny.cz (Dan =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hor=E1k?=) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 11:42:46 +0200 Subject: buildsystem stuck? In-Reply-To: <1146300433.3523.2.camel@eagle.danny.cz> References: <1146275738.3695.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1146300433.3523.2.camel@eagle.danny.cz> Message-ID: <1146303766.3523.6.camel@eagle.danny.cz> Dan Hor?k p??e v So 29. 04. 2006 v 10:47 +0200: > Dan Williams p??e v P? 28. 04. 2006 v 21:55 -0400: > > On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 12:33 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > > > Currently, 4 jobs taking 2+ hours are listed on > > > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/index.psp > > > > > > (Sorry, at least one of them is mine: maxima) > > > > Kicked, and the traceback worked around. I've mailed people whose > > builds didn't get into the database to requeue the jobs, but if you're > > unsure if your job got in, please requeue it. > > I think the build system is stuck again (or yet) on maxima. After requeueing of my jobs they were built. The original error was: ------- Starting download of https://extras64.linux.duke.edu:8886//fedora-development-extras/8514-qgit-1.2-1.fc6/qgit-1.2-1.fc6.src.rpm. Retrieved https://extras64.linux.duke.edu:8886//fedora-development-extras/8514-qgit-1.2-1.fc6/qgit-1.2-1.fc6.src.rpm. Waiting for repository to unlock before starting the build... Job waited too long for repo to unlock. Killing it... Killing build process... Cleaning up the buildroot... /usr/bin/setarch ppc32 /usr/bin/mock clean --uniqueext=9814202bb6fc69fa0d79af413c91fe05482f2fd6 -r fedora-development-ppc-core Killed. Waiting for child process 28807 to exit. -------- Dan From pertusus at free.fr Sat Apr 29 10:28:24 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 12:28:24 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060429091814.46a58346.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <20060428143335.GB2317@free.fr> <20060429091814.46a58346.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060429102824.GA2300@free.fr> > do the right thing, this enters the old loop of asking: What do we aim at > anyway? It would be a promise that we believe the packagers do the right > thing. It's not individuals who promise something, it's the entire FE > project which makes the promise. And when we do that, users should also be > able to rely on the project to maintain the full set of packages when a > packager doesn't respond [in time] or when a package is officially > orphaned. This brings us back to a security response team of You set the requirements for the fedora extras project quite high. So in that case we should try to add as little packages as possible. > volunteers. It simply doesn't work to let some packagers extend a legacy > branch with new packages when that might result in increased maintenance > requirements for the rest of the project either immediately or some time > later. Ok, but it also apply to new packages. I think it changes a little the scope of the fedora extras project, in my opinion. Not that I think that it is a bad idea, and indeed having such a goal would avoid the 'dumping ground' issue. But it implies a change in the process of acceptance of new packages. Indeed if a goal is 'support every package, and substitute to packagers when they leave' then a packager should take into account the burden he may leave to the whole project when he leaves, and that changes a lot the rules of the game. If this is agreed, for example, the packages providing duplicate functionnalities should be avoided unless there is a very good reason. Also complex packages that are hard to maintain should be avoided. And another thing that could be nice in that case would be to search for co-maintainers when the package is reviewed, and only accept if there are enough people ready to takeover if the packager leaves, and verify that there is no potential co-maintainer who accepts to be a fail-over for too much projects as the same time. And maybe also it would be good if the acceptance of new fedora extras member would be conditional on them accepting to be fail-over maintainer for existing packages, especially those with few failover packagers. If there aren't such changes in guidelines/procedures/institutions, we won't be able to achieve the reuirements you propose above. -- Pat From mpeters at mac.com Sat Apr 29 10:33:08 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 03:33:08 -0700 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <44531EAE.4060200@hhs.nl> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146073019.8655.12.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060426215759.GA5454@free.fr> <12082.192.54.193.51.1146138622.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060428120415.GC2315@free.fr> <1146256040.882.11.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <44531EAE.4060200@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1146306789.2456.117.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 10:07 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > I disagree, one one side we already have to much repos as is, and on the > other side some repos (the repo that should not be named) really need a > a split, Splitting it will not solve anything because of repoclosure - some packages will depend upon packages in the other split repos, so you will have to have them all configured anyway. There's already loss of functionality because of the repo splits we do have. wpa_supplicant does not support my atheros card because the drivers are in repo XXX. sox does not play mp3 because libmad/lame are in XXX. Both of those packages (wpa_supplicant and sox) belong in core, and madwifi and lame/libmad can not be in core. There's no way around that. Thus they have to be built with less than ideal capabilities in order to have repoclosure. But to split up XXX into several repositories based upon licensing - you are going to end up with packages depending upon packages in the other repos, so to have repoclosure - users will have to have them all configured and turned on anyway. Thus - it makes sense to have them all in one place, and have that place be in the country with the most liberal software laws we can find. From mpeters at mac.com Sat Apr 29 10:38:34 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 03:38:34 -0700 Subject: compat packages In-Reply-To: <20060429114030.e2d31742.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1145986454.6969.34.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> <1145990228.14151.3.camel@laurel.intra.city-fan.org> <1145991004.6969.40.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> <20060429114030.e2d31742.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1146307114.2456.123.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 11:40 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > Is this true? pkg-config uses an own package namespace for all its > template files. An application looking for gtkhtml-2{.pc} would not find > gtkhtml-3{.pc} and vice versa. And two different -devel packages using the > same file name for a pkgconfig file would conflict. > > In theory - they are suppose to change the name of the pkgconfig file if the shared library has versioned. /usr/lib/pkgconfig/libgtkhtml-3.8.pc is for gtkhtml-3.8.x and used to build packages that link against libgtkhtml-3.8.so /usr/lib/pkgconfig/libgtkhtml-3.6.pc is for gtkhtml-3.6.x - and for packages that link against libgtkhtml-3.6.so So the two devel packages live happily together side by side, with no file conflicts. From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sat Apr 29 11:00:05 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 13:00:05 +0200 Subject: package EOL In-Reply-To: <1146306789.2456.117.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> References: <444E79F2.1070700@knox.net.nz> <20060426014024.373820ec.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1146073019.8655.12.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060426215759.GA5454@free.fr> <12082.192.54.193.51.1146138622.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <20060428120415.GC2315@free.fr> <1146256040.882.11.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <44531EAE.4060200@hhs.nl> <1146306789.2456.117.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> Message-ID: <44534735.5070808@hhs.nl> Michael A. Peters wrote: > On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 10:07 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > >> I disagree, one one side we already have to much repos as is, and on the >> other side some repos (the repo that should not be named) really need a >> a split, > > Splitting it will not solve anything because of repoclosure - some > packages will depend upon packages in the other split repos, so you will > have to have them all configured anyway. > > There's already loss of functionality because of the repo splits we do > have. wpa_supplicant does not support my atheros card because the > drivers are in repo XXX. sox does not play mp3 because libmad/lame are > in XXX. > > Both of those packages (wpa_supplicant and sox) belong in core, and > madwifi and lame/libmad can not be in core. There's no way around that. > Thus they have to be built with less than ideal capabilities in order to > have repoclosure. > > But to split up XXX into several repositories based upon licensing - you > are going to end up with packages depending upon packages in the other > repos, so to have repoclosure - users will have to have them all > configured and turned on anyway. Thus - it makes sense to have them all > in one place, and have that place be in the country with the most > liberal software laws we can find. > There is real easy solution for this in case of XXX, first the catagories I propose: -XXX Non commercial use (otherwise 100% free) -XXX patent encumbered (aka non US) -XXX Non free Now if something is Non commercial use but otherwise ok but depenends on something none free drop it in non free it self. IOW if something depends on things in a "less free" repo put it in the less free repo. AFAIK we already do that if something itself does not contain patented code but does use libraries which contain patented code we drop it in the current XXX even if that something on itself is 100% free. I do see one problem with this, software can be both patent encumbered and non commercial use only. Since the ideas behind the split are: 1) To allow non 100% free but otherwise legal in the US (and others) software to be in a repo which we can actually name and point users too. So that we dispite the fact that we would rather not encourage binary drivers can tell users how to get their 3D to work, or their wifi. (Notice I myself only buy 100% free supported hardware, all my machines have radeon 9200 or i8xx/i9xx. Unfortunatly people I know who ask me for Linux advice don't always have 100% free supported hw). 2) To allow people like me who don't mind non-commercial use clauses in licenses, but who do mind closed source, to select repo's in such a way that they won't "accidently" install closed source. This would require 4 XXX repos: -XXX non commercial -XXX patented -XXX patented and non commercial -XXX non free I assume here that all non free stuff if it contains patents comes with a patent license. Or what I would prefer is to relax requirement 2 a bit and put patented and non commercial stuff in patented repo, then again one can also argue (especially as a european for now) that sw patents are not an issue for me, but freeness is. This would plea for the 4 way split. Or maybe for simplicity sake a 3 way split somewhat like debian has: -patented without a valid patent license but other wise free. -both patented other wise non free -not patented or with a valid patent license but non free. So in Debian terms: -non US (we could use our current XXX for that) -non US & non Free -non Free (gees haven't we heard people arguing in favor of such a repo before?) I personally believe that idea 1) is something important and worthwhile pursuing idea 2 although nice is mostly for people who are familiar enough with this kinda stuff to figure things out themselves. Regards, Hans From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 29 11:24:13 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 11:24:13 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-29 Message-ID: <20060429112413.3980.32024@rawhide.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 sqlite-tcl 2.8.16-1.i386 stripesnoop-devel 1.5-2.fc3.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 sqlite-tcl 2.8.16-1.x86_64 stripesnoop-devel 1.5-2.fc3.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: sqlite-tcl - 2.8.16-1.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: sqlite = 0:2.8.16-1 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: stripesnoop-devel - 1.5-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: stripesnoop = 0:1.5-2.fc3 package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: stripesnoop-devel - 1.5-2.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: stripesnoop = 0:1.5-2.fc3 package: sqlite-tcl - 2.8.16-1.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: sqlite = 0:2.8.16-1 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 29 11:24:22 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 11:24:22 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-29 Message-ID: <20060429112422.3981.63769@rawhide.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch rpy 0.4.6-7.fc4.i386 scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch rpy 0.4.6-7.fc4.ppc scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch rpy 0.4.6-7.fc4.x86_64 scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.0.0-3.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.0.0-3.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9()(64bit) package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.0.0-3.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 29 11:24:27 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 11:24:27 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-29 Message-ID: <20060429112427.3982.77019@rawhide.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rpy 0.4.6-7.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rpy 0.4.6-7.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- rpy 0.4.6-7.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-5-i386 unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-5-x86_64 unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-5-ppc unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 29 11:24:36 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 11:24:36 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-29 Message-ID: <20060429112436.3983.19040@rawhide.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 rpy 0.4.6-7.fc5.i386 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc rpy 0.4.6-7.fc5.ppc sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 rpy 0.4.6-7.fc5.x86_64 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0 libobby-0.3.so.0 package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomeui.so.32 libzvt.so.2 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libglade libgnomeui.so.32 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) gnome-libs libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libobby-0.3.so.0()(64bit) package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: rpy - 0.4.6-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: R = 0:2.2.1 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libglade libgnomeui.so.32 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0 libobby-0.3.so.0 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomeui.so.32 libzvt.so.2 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 29 13:58:50 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 15:58:50 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060429102824.GA2300@free.fr> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <20060428143335.GB2317@free.fr> <20060429091814.46a58346.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060429102824.GA2300@free.fr> Message-ID: <20060429155850.fe1ae6dc.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 12:28:24 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > do the right thing, this enters the old loop of asking: What do we aim at > > anyway? It would be a promise that we believe the packagers do the right > > thing. It's not individuals who promise something, it's the entire FE > > project which makes the promise. And when we do that, users should also be > > able to rely on the project to maintain the full set of packages when a > > packager doesn't respond [in time] or when a package is officially > > orphaned. This brings us back to a security response team of > > You set the requirements for the fedora extras project quite high. So in that > case we should try to add as little packages as possible. Argh, I think you misunderstood me, but read on. > > volunteers. It simply doesn't work to let some packagers extend a legacy > > branch with new packages when that might result in increased maintenance > > requirements for the rest of the project either immediately or some time > > later. > > Ok, but it also apply to new packages. Yes, here I agree. Every unmaintained/orphaned package is bad, regardless of whether it is in the active or legacy branches. We will need to deal with orphans in a more radical way. We're given an example in form of _fire'n'forget packages_, which are packages which pass through the review process normally, but then are discovered as being orphaned already a few weeks/months later or during preparation of FC(n+1), because a contributor and package owner changed his mind or [insert many theoretical reasons here]. However, what you seem to ignore constantly is the planning reliability. The planning reliability for those who would maintain the legacy branches in replacement of original package owners. Assume we [the FE project] transferred the FE3 branch into maintenance state tomorrow, because the newly formed security response team had had announced that they wanted to tackle the problem of keeping FE3 secure as long as FC3 is maintained by Fedora Legacy. Do we want to keep the gates wide open and permit arbitrary contributors to fill FE3 with new packages which make FE3 grow and may need to be fixed by the security team sooner or later? I think we don't want that. Similarly, we don't want unnecessary upgrades (i.e. version upgrades with the sole purpose of staying in sync with upstream's release habits) as they increase the risk (and I've pointed that out before in older messages) of "regression, dead-end breakage and increased maintenance requirements" not only for their owner, but also for other contributors, such as packagers with dependencies, or the security team. Watch the repoclosure reports! Some of the avoidable breakage that happens in current branches during version upgrades would likely happen in legacy branches, too. Whether an individual's packages are trivial to maintain in multiple branches for a long time, doesn't matter. The big picture is what matters. > I think it changes a little the scope > of the fedora extras project, in my opinion. Not that I think that it is > a bad idea, and indeed having such a goal would avoid the 'dumping ground' > issue. Please, let's not loop back again. FE will approach that dumping ground when we fail to define the life-time of FE branches and a maintenance model compared with FC. > But it implies a change in the process of acceptance of new packages. [cut] [I cut off the quote here, because it is irrelevant to what I've tried to say. I do not mean to increase the hurdle and require N>=2 owners for every new package which enters FE. And I do not mean to require that no package may ever be orphaned or dropped from the repositories.] From tibbs at math.uh.edu Sat Apr 29 13:58:52 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 08:58:52 -0500 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146296995.7621.211.camel@localhost.localdomain> (Callum Lerwick's message of "Sat, 29 Apr 2006 02:49:54 -0500") References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> <1146296995.7621.211.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: >>>>> "CL" == Callum Lerwick writes: CL> I'm for taking a hard line on EOL. No new packages, not even CL> upgrades. Backported security fixes only. You just placed an enormous load on the poor security team, who now have to be able to manipulate the source of every program in Extras so that they can backport fixes. Sometimes it makes more sense, or is simply more expedient, to upgrade. CL> Its called EOL for a reason. And it's called a volunteer project for a reason. - J< From jkeating at redhat.com Sat Apr 29 15:02:46 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 11:02:46 -0400 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060429085227.GC10223@neu.nirvana> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> <20060429085227.GC10223@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1146322966.13972.27.camel@ender> On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 10:52 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > How about a compromise? Externally (toward the users) the official > position is that there is no official support (*) anymore other than > security fixes, while packagers are still allowed to update legacied' > releases at their own discretion w/o having to go through loops? Because no matter what we "say" is policy, end users would continue to see random packages change in EOL releases, which is not a clear message. Come on guys, if you need a longer lifespan than what Fedora provides (the full thing, including Legacy), mayhap you need to be looking for a different project. RHEL/CentOS exists for a reason. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From pertusus at free.fr Sat Apr 29 15:28:24 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 17:28:24 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060429155850.fe1ae6dc.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <20060428143335.GB2317@free.fr> <20060429091814.46a58346.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060429102824.GA2300@free.fr> <20060429155850.fe1ae6dc.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20060429152824.GA2305@free.fr> > The planning reliability for those who would maintain the legacy branches > in replacement of original package owners. Assume we [the FE project] > transferred the FE3 branch into maintenance state tomorrow, because the > newly formed security response team had had announced that they wanted to > tackle the problem of keeping FE3 secure as long as FC3 is maintained by > Fedora Legacy. Do we want to keep the gates wide open and permit arbitrary > contributors to fill FE3 with new packages which make FE3 grow and may > need to be fixed by the security team sooner or later? I think we don't > want that. I can't see how it is different for current releases. The same exactly applies for current releases (I substituted FE3 by FE4/FE5...): "Do we want to keep the gates wide open and permit arbitrary to fill FE4/FE5 with new packages which make FE4/FE5 grow and may need to be fixed by the security team sooner or later?" A package added in FE4/FE5 will have to be maintained much longer than a package added in FE3. And in my opinion it is better to have a package added to the FE3 branche by a contributor really willing to maintain that branch than a package added to FE4/FE5 by a contributor that don't want to really take care of that package in the long term. -- Pat From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Sat Apr 29 15:42:52 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 17:42:52 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146322966.13972.27.camel@ender> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> <20060429085227.GC10223@neu.nirvana> <1146322966.13972.27.camel@ender> Message-ID: <20060429154252.GG10223@neu.nirvana> On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 11:02:46AM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 10:52 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > > How about a compromise? Externally (toward the users) the official > > position is that there is no official support (*) anymore other than > > security fixes, while packagers are still allowed to update legacied' > > releases at their own discretion w/o having to go through loops? > > Because no matter what we "say" is policy, end users would continue to > see random packages change in EOL releases, which is not a clear > message. Don't call them EOL, they're in legacy/maintenance mode ;) The message to the users is that after mode switching to legacy the support for package upgrades drops. That's different from the promise of no packages upgrades ever. > Come on guys, if you need a longer lifespan than what Fedora > provides (the full thing, including Legacy), mayhap you need to be > looking for a different project. RHEL/CentOS exists for a reason. Noone is asking for longer lifespans, on the contrary, most of us (the packagers) would be very happy if there were no or a minimal maintenance lifetime only, so we won't have to fork the packages into current vs mainentance modes. In fact the long total lifespan is what generates this discussion. I think we're arguing on the same side. We all want to look forward with our packaging. And freezing upgrades on legacy releases will only make packagers spend more time with old stuff (backporting security fixes) that will then be missed with ongoing stuff. Even in the ideal situation of 2 current and 2 legacy releases you end up maintaining 3 versions of a package. And right now we are still far from 2 legacy releases (we're at 5). It's a workload calculation, where you don't want to penalize packagers, because you do want them to foxus on current/future releases. The next suggestion would be to completely take the load of the forward looking packager and plac it on a security team. That will also not really help, after all, the package maintainer is the one that knows about his package the best and will need the smallest amount of time to fix it (or upgrade it). So if you put all available manhours together (packagers and security team) you will find that most of the time it will be cheaper to have the package maintainer fix the packages. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From cw-lists at arcor.de Sat Apr 29 15:49:21 2006 From: cw-lists at arcor.de (Christoph Wickert) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 17:49:21 +0200 Subject: buildsystem stuck? In-Reply-To: <1146275738.3695.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1146275738.3695.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1146325761.3356.3.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Am Freitag, den 28.04.2006, 21:55 -0400 schrieb Dan Williams: > On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 12:33 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > > Currently, 4 jobs taking 2+ hours are listed on > > http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/index.psp > > > > (Sorry, at least one of them is mine: maxima) > > Kicked, and the traceback worked around. Can you kick it again, please? Rex's maxima package ist building for more than 12 hours now and I have ~ 20 jobs to requeue :( Chris From jkeating at redhat.com Sat Apr 29 15:54:27 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 11:54:27 -0400 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060429154252.GG10223@neu.nirvana> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> <20060429085227.GC10223@neu.nirvana> <1146322966.13972.27.camel@ender> <20060429154252.GG10223@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1146326068.13972.30.camel@ender> On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 17:42 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > I think we're arguing on the same side. We all want to look forward > with our packaging. And freezing upgrades on legacy releases will only > make packagers spend more time with old stuff (backporting security > fixes) that will then be missed with ongoing stuff. Even in the ideal > situation of 2 current and 2 legacy releases you end up maintaining 3 > versions of a package. And right now we are still far from 2 legacy > releases (we're at 5). Ok, here's the source of our problem. You've assumed that security fixes have to be backported. Nowhere is this / should this be said. I'm perfectly fine with doing package UPgrades to fix a security issue. I just don't want to see upgrades just for the sake of upgrades. Upgrades should happen only to resolve a security issue. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Sat Apr 29 16:02:25 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 18:02:25 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146326068.13972.30.camel@ender> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> <20060429085227.GC10223@neu.nirvana> <1146322966.13972.27.camel@ender> <20060429154252.GG10223@neu.nirvana> <1146326068.13972.30.camel@ender> Message-ID: <20060429160225.GJ10223@neu.nirvana> On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 11:54:27AM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 17:42 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > I think we're arguing on the same side. We all want to look > > forward with our packaging. And freezing upgrades on legacy > > releases will only make packagers spend more time with old stuff > > (backporting security fixes) that will then be missed with ongoing > > stuff. Even in the ideal situation of 2 current and 2 legacy > > releases you end up maintaining 3 versions of a package. And right > > now we are still far from 2 legacy releases (we're at 5). > > Ok, here's the source of our problem. You've assumed that security > fixes have to be backported. Nowhere is this / should this be said. Well, it was suggested on this thread and wasn't outruled (yet). > I'm perfectly fine with doing package UPgrades to fix a security > issue. I just don't want to see upgrades just for the sake of > upgrades. Upgrades should happen only to resolve a security issue. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tibbs at math.uh.edu Sat Apr 29 16:03:28 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 11:03:28 -0500 Subject: buildsystem stuck? In-Reply-To: <1146325761.3356.3.camel@hal9000.local.lan> (Christoph Wickert's message of "Sat, 29 Apr 2006 17:49:21 +0200") References: <1146275738.3695.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1146325761.3356.3.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: >>>>> "CW" == Christoph Wickert writes: CW> Can you kick it again, please? Rex's maxima package ist building CW> for more than 12 hours now and I have ~ 20 jobs to requeue :( Other jobs are moving through the queue; it's just Maxima that's stuck. (Seth kicked things a little while ago.) - J< From mpeters at mac.com Sat Apr 29 16:10:21 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 09:10:21 -0700 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146326068.13972.30.camel@ender> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> <20060429085227.GC10223@neu.nirvana> <1146322966.13972.27.camel@ender> <20060429154252.GG10223@neu.nirvana> <1146326068.13972.30.camel@ender> Message-ID: <1146327021.20070.2.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 11:54 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > > Ok, here's the source of our problem. You've assumed that security > fixes have to be backported. Nowhere is this / should this be said. > I'm perfectly fine with doing package UPgrades to fix a security issue. > I just don't want to see upgrades just for the sake of upgrades. > Upgrades should happen only to resolve a security issue. > I agree with that. No new packages in EOL releases - if the user wants that shiny new package w/o upgrading, they are free to get the src.rpm and rebuild it. Version updates should only fix security issues. From kaboom at oobleck.net Sat Apr 29 16:14:24 2006 From: kaboom at oobleck.net (Chris Ricker) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 12:14:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146296995.7621.211.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> <1146296995.7621.211.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Sat, 29 Apr 2006, Callum Lerwick wrote: > I'm for taking a hard line on EOL. No new packages, not even upgrades. > Backported security fixes only. Are you going to do all the backporting? Sometimes upgrades make more sense.... I agree that there should be no new packages on the maintenance branches, but upgrades of existing packages for security fixes is fine later, chris From mpeters at mac.com Sat Apr 29 16:29:29 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 09:29:29 -0700 Subject: buildsystem stuck? In-Reply-To: References: <1146275738.3695.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1146325761.3356.3.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: <1146328169.20070.7.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 11:03 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>> "CW" == Christoph Wickert writes: > > CW> Can you kick it again, please? Rex's maxima package ist building > CW> for more than 12 hours now and I have ~ 20 jobs to requeue :( > > Other jobs are moving through the queue; it's just Maxima that's > stuck. (Seth kicked things a little while ago.) I've had a package fail 3 times on PPC due to being killed by a locked repo. The package went through fine on fc4 and devel - only fc5 on the ppc build. http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=8502 http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=8508 http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=8518 The last one I waited to re-cue. Tried 3 hours ago. I'll try again - but if it fails again, I'll just wait until monday. From jkeating at redhat.com Sat Apr 29 16:30:57 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 12:30:57 -0400 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060429160225.GJ10223@neu.nirvana> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> <20060429085227.GC10223@neu.nirvana> <1146322966.13972.27.camel@ender> <20060429154252.GG10223@neu.nirvana> <1146326068.13972.30.camel@ender> <20060429160225.GJ10223@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1146328257.13972.32.camel@ender> On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 18:02 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > Well, it was suggested on this thread and wasn't outruled (yet). Well, I would like to 'outrule' it. Forcing extras to backport when Core doesn't even do that is a bit silly, and obtrusive to the maintainer. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 29 16:37:28 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 18:37:28 +0200 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <20060429152824.GA2305@free.fr> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <20060428143335.GB2317@free.fr> <20060429091814.46a58346.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060429102824.GA2300@free.fr> <20060429155850.fe1ae6dc.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20060429152824.GA2305@free.fr> Message-ID: <20060429183728.94dbc746.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 17:28:24 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > The planning reliability for those who would maintain the legacy branches > > in replacement of original package owners. Assume we [the FE project] > > transferred the FE3 branch into maintenance state tomorrow, because the > > newly formed security response team had had announced that they wanted to > > tackle the problem of keeping FE3 secure as long as FC3 is maintained by > > Fedora Legacy. Do we want to keep the gates wide open and permit arbitrary > > contributors to fill FE3 with new packages which make FE3 grow and may > > need to be fixed by the security team sooner or later? I think we don't > > want that. > > I can't see how it is different for current releases. The same exactly > applies for current releases (I substituted FE3 by FE4/FE5...): The difference is that the number of packages in the legacy release does not increase, while the active and development branches still grow (and shrink where orphans are removed from devel). This means the security team faces a known constant number of packages when they start and try (!) for the first time whether keeping FE3 in maintenance state is feasible. That is the minimal level of planning reliability (influenced by a multitude of factors) they can get. It is exactly like Fedora Legacy started. Trial-and-error. Start with a few contributors and find out whether the workload is doable. Else stop supporting a release due to lack of resources (= often lack of interest). The entire thing is a feasibility study. Now, if you argue that FE4 and FE5 will contain many more packages than FE3 when they are declared legacy, well, do we discuss scalability now as the most-important criterion? Who says that FC4 will be maintained as long as FC3 or RHL9? Who says that FE3 is still maintained when FE5 is added to the set? And sure, the security team may need to scale well as FE grows. But it's more important to start somewhere, avoiding a moving target. > A package added in FE4/FE5 will have to be maintained much longer than a > package added in FE3. ? > And in my opinion it is better to have a package added > to the FE3 branche by a contributor really willing to maintain that branch > than a package added to FE4/FE5 by a contributor that don't want to really > take care of that package in the long term. Once and for all, it does not matter whether individuals may be able to maintain their packages for a dozen distribution versions, always up-to-date, always secure, always bug-free. The state of the package _universe_ for a given distribution version is what matters. From cw-lists at arcor.de Sat Apr 29 16:54:14 2006 From: cw-lists at arcor.de (Christoph Wickert) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 18:54:14 +0200 Subject: buildsystem stuck? In-Reply-To: <1146328169.20070.7.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> References: <1146275738.3695.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1146325761.3356.3.camel@hal9000.local.lan> <1146328169.20070.7.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> Message-ID: <1146329655.3356.15.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Am Samstag, den 29.04.2006, 09:29 -0700 schrieb Michael A. Peters: > On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 11:03 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > >>>>> "CW" == Christoph Wickert writes: > > > > CW> Can you kick it again, please? Rex's maxima package ist building > > CW> for more than 12 hours now and I have ~ 20 jobs to requeue :( > > > > Other jobs are moving through the queue; it's just Maxima that's > > stuck. (Seth kicked things a little while ago.) > > I've had a package fail 3 times on PPC due to being killed by a locked > repo. The package went through fine on fc4 and devel - only fc5 on the > ppc build. Same here. I konw these packages _do_ build, but they all fail on ppc: > Retrieved https://extras64.linux.duke.edu:8886//fedora-4-extras/8474-xfce4-screenshooter-plugin-0.0.8-2.fc4/xfce4-screenshooter-plugin-0.0.8-2.fc4.src.rpm. > Waiting for repository to unlock before starting the build... > Job waited too long for repo to unlock. Killing it... > Killing build process... > Cleaning up the buildroot... > /usr/bin/setarch ppc32 /usr/bin/mock clean --uniqueext=7376dcb259328d91190f6e20ad30dfe0585e282b -r fedora-4-ppc-core > Killed. > Waiting for child process 5126 to exit. Christoph From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Sat Apr 29 16:59:12 2006 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 18:59:12 +0200 Subject: Confusing use of EOL term Message-ID: <20060429165912.GK10223@neu.nirvana> Hi, threads that use the word "EOL" (and "support") very soon come to the point where people use different notions of them and the thread's signal to noise ratio drops. Historically EOL was used for the point in time when RH passed maintenance of RHL or FC over to Fedora Legacy. But later it was considered bad marketing to call a security maintained release as already EOL'd. Currently the most prominent URL mentioning EOL and Fedora under redhat.com is the project definition of Fedora Legacy, which uses EOL in the above way and calls the "total EOL" an effective lifetime. http://fedora.redhat.com/About/Projects/legacy.html says: | The goal of The Fedora Legacy Project is to work with the Linux | community to provide security and critical bug fix errata packages | for select Red Hat Linux and Fedora Core releases after they reach | their EOL, thus extending their effective lifetime in environments | where frequent upgrades are not possible or desirable. I think these definitions need to be sorted out and used consistently everywhere. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jkeating at redhat.com Sat Apr 29 17:05:24 2006 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 13:05:24 -0400 Subject: Confusing use of EOL term In-Reply-To: <20060429165912.GK10223@neu.nirvana> References: <20060429165912.GK10223@neu.nirvana> Message-ID: <1146330324.13972.34.camel@ender> On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 18:59 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > http://fedora.redhat.com/About/Projects/legacy.html says: > | The goal of The Fedora Legacy Project is to work with the Linux > | community to provide security and critical bug fix errata packages > | for select Red Hat Linux and Fedora Core releases after they reach > | their EOL, thus extending their effective lifetime in environments > | where frequent upgrades are not possible or desirable. > > I think these definitions need to be sorted out and used consistently > everywhere. You are very correct. I can change this one right now, and longer term we're moving all this content over to fedoraproject.org so that it can be changed more easily. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From mpeters at mac.com Sat Apr 29 17:06:46 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:06:46 -0700 Subject: buildsystem stuck? In-Reply-To: <1146329655.3356.15.camel@hal9000.local.lan> References: <1146275738.3695.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1146325761.3356.3.camel@hal9000.local.lan> <1146328169.20070.7.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> <1146329655.3356.15.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Message-ID: <1146330407.20070.9.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 18:54 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > Same here. I konw these packages _do_ build, but they all fail on ppc: Mine just went through fine - so i think it is working again. From thm at duke.edu Sat Apr 29 17:39:34 2006 From: thm at duke.edu (Hunter Matthews) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 13:39:34 -0400 Subject: perl-MIME-Lite In-Reply-To: <1119430480.12792.43.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <1119430480.12792.43.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <1146332374.2851.12.camel@jade> On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 10:54 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > Hi, > > perl-MIME-Lite is part of FE's CVS for quite a while, but it doesn't > seem to have been released, yet. > > Is there particular reason for not releasing it? [1] I'm a bad person for starting something and not finishing it? Unfortunately, time constraints really mean I should not be the maintainer for this. I'd be happy for anyone to take this over and undo the evil I have wrought. Thanks for your kind note about the spec itself - I tried. -- Hunter Matthews Unix / Network Administrator Office: BioScience 145/244 Duke Univ. Biology Department Key: F0F88438 / FFB5 34C0 B350 99A4 BB02 9779 A5DB 8B09 F0F8 8438 Never take candy from strangers. Especially on the internet. From cw-lists at arcor.de Sat Apr 29 18:23:54 2006 From: cw-lists at arcor.de (Christoph Wickert) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 20:23:54 +0200 Subject: buildsystem stuck? In-Reply-To: <1146330407.20070.9.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> References: <1146275738.3695.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1146325761.3356.3.camel@hal9000.local.lan> <1146328169.20070.7.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> <1146329655.3356.15.camel@hal9000.local.lan> <1146330407.20070.9.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> Message-ID: <1146335034.3356.23.camel@hal9000.local.lan> Am Samstag, den 29.04.2006, 10:06 -0700 schrieb Michael A. Peters: > On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 18:54 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > > > > Same here. I konw these packages _do_ build, but they all fail on ppc: > > Mine just went through fine - so i think it is working again. > I manged to get three packages through, but now I'm getting > [chris at hal9000 devel]$ plague-client requeue 8469 > Error: an error ocurred connecting to the server. '(-2, 'Name or service not known')' > [chris at hal9000 devel]$ plague-client requeue 8469 > Error: an error ocurred connecting to the server. '(-2, 'Name or service not known')' for more than an hour now. Chris From smooge at gmail.com Sat Apr 29 19:21:36 2006 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 13:21:36 -0600 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146328257.13972.32.camel@ender> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> <20060428102045.GA2338@free.fr> <1146255746.13972.7.camel@ender> <20060429085227.GC10223@neu.nirvana> <1146322966.13972.27.camel@ender> <20060429154252.GG10223@neu.nirvana> <1146326068.13972.30.camel@ender> <20060429160225.GJ10223@neu.nirvana> <1146328257.13972.32.camel@ender> Message-ID: <80d7e4090604291221r74e788b3w4c6bbb8025af143b@mail.gmail.com> On 4/29/06, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 18:02 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > Well, it was suggested on this thread and wasn't outruled (yet). > > Well, I would like to 'outrule' it. Forcing extras to backport when > Core doesn't even do that is a bit silly, and obtrusive to the > maintainer. > I would agree on that also. My inaccurate estimates of manpower is that we have 4-6 part-time developers, and 4-8 part-time QA people. That doesn't leave a lot of energy/time to backport code. -- Stephen J Smoogen. CSIRT/Linux System Administrator From michael at knox.net.nz Sat Apr 29 19:43:33 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 07:43:33 +1200 Subject: homes for the homeless. In-Reply-To: <20060429113435.9cbc54e6.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <444DD00D.9090705@knox.net.nz> <1145967763.3806.2.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> <444E6E3E.7080402@knox.net.nz> <1145995007.27459.6.camel@shuttle.piedmont.com> <20060429113435.9cbc54e6.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <4453C1E5.1080709@knox.net.nz> Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:56:47 -0400, Brian Pepple wrote: > > [Sodipodi] > >> Well, the projects last release was in February of 2004, and all bug >> reports for the last year or so have been unanswered by Lauris. Also, >> CVS appears not to have been touched for ages. Here's Lauris last >> message on the mailing list from back in March 2005: >> http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=6795136&forum_id=3970 >> >> In my book, I would consider it not being actively developed. > > A co-maintainers's message is in the same thread, btw: > > | I can"t admin the project after all > | > | Back in January, Lauris made me an admin so that we would have someone > | other than himself to approve checkins. I wanted to revitalize > | Sodipodi, do cool stuff, etc. But first I had to meet this work deadline. > | > | Well. Now that that"s done, six weeks later, I need to admit that I"ve > | changed my mind. There are two reasons here. The first is that I got > | handed another, higher-priority responsibility, and probably won"t have > | time for Sodipodi. The second is that I finally got around to taking a > | look at Inkscape, and, frankly, it"s so much further ahead that I don"t > | see much point in continuing to work on Sodipodi. Anybody have a > | counterargument? > First package to hit a "retired" page on the wiki? Michael From jamatos at fc.up.pt Sat Apr 29 21:44:47 2006 From: jamatos at fc.up.pt (Jose' Matos) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 22:44:47 +0100 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-29 In-Reply-To: <20060429112427.3982.77019@rawhide.intranet> References: <20060429112427.3982.77019@rawhide.intranet> Message-ID: <200604292244.47495.jamatos@fc.up.pt> On Saturday 29 April 2006 12:24, Michael Schwendt wrote: > Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > rpy 0.4.6-7.fc5.i386 This is not the latest package. The messages that appeared before reported rpy 0.4.6-10 as the latest version. :-) Was this report supposed to be related with last build report update? Just curious. :-) -- Jos? Ab?lio From ville.skytta at iki.fi Sat Apr 29 22:05:01 2006 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 01:05:01 +0300 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-29 In-Reply-To: <200604292244.47495.jamatos@fc.up.pt> References: <20060429112427.3982.77019@rawhide.intranet> <200604292244.47495.jamatos@fc.up.pt> Message-ID: <1146348302.2738.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 22:44 +0100, Jose' Matos wrote: > On Saturday 29 April 2006 12:24, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > rpy 0.4.6-7.fc5.i386 > > This is not the latest package. The messages that appeared before reported > rpy 0.4.6-10 as the latest version. :-) > > Was this report supposed to be related with last build report update? Just > curious. :-) Despite of the build reports sent to the list today, things are still somewhat in flux after the buildsys move/reorganization, and as far as I know, the new packages didn't actually end up in the public repos yet [0]. Without knowing the details, I'd guess its possible that the dep report was done against the old packages. [0] People who should be able to fix it have been notified, no info yet From kevin.kofler at chello.at Sat Apr 29 22:08:19 2006 From: kevin.kofler at chello.at (Kevin Kofler) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 22:08:19 +0000 (UTC) Subject: packaging java apps References: <44528CC9.2030002@knox.net.nz> <20060428224351.GB7859@rathann.pekin.waw.pl> Message-ID: Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski writes: > JPackage.org-like packaging seems to be the preferred way here. But unlike JPackage.org, you should be running aot-compile-rpm to get natively-compiled .so's for gij (in addition to the .jar files), which also implies you need to BuildRequire the java-gcj-compat devel package (not just java-devel) and your packages will be arch-specific (but much faster for gij users than if you don't do that). The people who worked on GCJ in Fedora and aot-compile-rpm all hang around on the fedora-devel-java-list, so you may also want to ask there for some packaging guidelines. Kevin Kofler From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Apr 29 22:47:08 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 00:47:08 +0200 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 5 - 2006-04-29 In-Reply-To: <1146348302.2738.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060429112427.3982.77019@rawhide.intranet> <200604292244.47495.jamatos@fc.up.pt> <1146348302.2738.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20060430004708.24a121f6.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 01:05:01 +0300, Ville Skytt? wrote: > On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 22:44 +0100, Jose' Matos wrote: > > On Saturday 29 April 2006 12:24, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-5-i386: > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > rpy 0.4.6-7.fc5.i386 > > > > This is not the latest package. The messages that appeared before reported > > rpy 0.4.6-10 as the latest version. :-) > > > > Was this report supposed to be related with last build report update? Just > > curious. :-) > > Despite of the build reports sent to the list today, things are still > somewhat in flux after the buildsys move/reorganization, and as far as I > know, the new packages didn't actually end up in the public repos yet > [0]. Without knowing the details, I'd guess its possible that the dep > report was done against the old packages. Yes, the report was triggered without seeing that the push was unsuccessful. From tibbs at math.uh.edu Sun Apr 30 02:08:08 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 21:08:08 -0500 Subject: How forbidden is RPATH? Message-ID: I'm reviewing a package (rapidsvn, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190139) that makes rpmlint complain: E: rapidsvn binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/rapidsvn ['/usr/lib64'] I have tried absolutely everything I can think of to get rid of this. Either it doesn't work or it breaks the build. Now rpmlint says this is an error, but http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/RpathCheckBuildsys says this is a minor issue. So I'm not sure what to do; if the package can't be approved as is then could someone who actually understands autoconf and libtool (i.e. not me) take a look? - J< From toshio at tiki-lounge.com Sun Apr 30 06:08:33 2006 From: toshio at tiki-lounge.com (Toshio Kuratomi) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 23:08:33 -0700 Subject: How forbidden is RPATH? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1146377314.3878.8.camel@localhost> On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 21:08 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > I'm reviewing a package (rapidsvn, > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190139) that > makes rpmlint complain: > > E: rapidsvn binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/rapidsvn ['/usr/lib64'] > > I have tried absolutely everything I can think of to get rid of this. > Either it doesn't work or it breaks the build. > > Now rpmlint says this is an error, but > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/RpathCheckBuildsys > says this is a minor issue. So I'm not sure what to do; if the > package can't be approved as is then could someone who actually > understands autoconf and libtool (i.e. not me) take a look? > Here's the link line where the rpath is inserted:: g++ -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic -Wall -g -fexceptions -I/usr/lib64/wx/include/gtk2-unicode-release-2.6 -I/usr/include/wx-2.6 -DGTK_NO_CHECK_CASTS -D__WXGTK__ -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_LARGE_FILES -DNO_GCC_PRAGMA -o .libs/svncpptest svncpptest-main.o svncpptest-test_url.o svncpptest-test_path.o -L/pkgs/cvs/rapidsvn-0.9.1-2/rapidsvn-0.9.1/src/svncpp -L/usr/lib64 -lcppunit /pkgs/cvs/rapidsvn-0.9.1-2/rapidsvn-0.9.1/src/svncpp/.libs/libsvncpp.so /usr/lib64/libsvn_client-1.so /usr/lib64/libsvn_wc-1.so /usr/lib64/libsvn_ra-1.so /usr/lib64/libsvn_delta-1.so /usr/lib64/libsvn_subr-1.so /usr/lib64/libneon.so /usr/lib64/libapr-1.so -lpthread -ldl /usr/lib64/libaprutil-1.so -lldap -llber /usr/lib64/libdb-4.3.so /usr/lib64/libexpat.so -Wl,--rpath -Wl,/usr/lib64 It's being added into the link line by libtool. Here's how to get rid of it:: make LIBTOOL=/usr/bin/libtool I've updated the wiki page to reflect that this may sometimes be the best way to pass the LIBTOOL line into the build. (And yes, it is best to avoid RPATHs whenever possible.) -Toshio -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 30 08:39:35 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 10:39:35 +0200 Subject: How forbidden is RPATH? In-Reply-To: <1146377314.3878.8.camel@localhost> References: <1146377314.3878.8.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <20060430103935.934f28f1.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 23:08:33 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > lpthread -ldl /usr/lib64/libaprutil-1.so -lldap -llber /usr/lib64/libdb-4.3.so /usr/lib64/libexpat.so -Wl,--rpath -Wl,/usr/lib64 > > It's being added into the link line by libtool. Here's how to get rid > of it:: > make LIBTOOL=/usr/bin/libtool > > I've updated the wiki page to reflect that this may sometimes be the > best way to pass the LIBTOOL line into the build. Actually, it's quite the opposite. It's a crude hack, which may result in unexpected side-effects when the other generated libtool/automake files become too different from the enforced /usr/bin/libtool From joost at soeterbroek.com Sun Apr 30 10:00:03 2006 From: joost at soeterbroek.com (Joost Soeterbroek) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 12:00:03 +0200 Subject: Best practices wrt. Changelog entries in spec file (upstream vs. specfile) Message-ID: <44548AA3.3020406@soeterbroek.com> Hi, I have a question regarding Changelog entries in spec files. When packaging for a new upstream version of a given package you have to deal with 2 different changelog informations: 1) upstream/source specific changelog information 2) spec file/packager specific changelog information I am unsure how best to deal with both of these. The FE guidelines regarding Changelogs in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines only mentions spec file specific changelog info, but says nothing about upstream. I do think it is relevant to include upstream changelog also. As an example, I have just bumped the heartbeat package in Fedora Extras from 2.0.4-2 to 2.0.5-1. I ended up using a combination of minuses for the package specific changelog entries and indented plusses for the upstream changelog which seemed acceptable to rpmlint, as in: %changelog * Date Name Packager - package changelog + upstream changelog Example for heartbeat package: %changelog * Thu Apr 27 2006 Joost Soeterbroek - 2.0.5-1 - upstream version 2.0.5 - removed patch2 - ownership of /heartbeat/crm/cib.xml is no longer set in cts/CM_LinuxHAv2.py.in + Version 2.0.5 - significant bug fixes and a few feature deficits fixed + various portability fixes + enable GUI to run with pygtk 2.4 + significant GUI improvements and speedups Comments,ideas? Joost From lists at timj.co.uk Sun Apr 30 10:12:58 2006 From: lists at timj.co.uk (Tim Jackson) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 11:12:58 +0100 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> References: <1146203217.20233.15.camel@thl.ct.heise.de> Message-ID: <44548DAA.2000004@timj.co.uk> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: [EOL stuff] Having read the many useful and almost exclusively constructive opinions in this thread, I personally don't think that there are massive fundamental differences between what everyone thinks, though the devil is in the detail. Personally, I 100% agree with the modest proposals that Thorsten has put forward to get the ball rolling. A few random but important points that I have picked up from the thread in general: 1. no completely new packages in EOL/legacy/maintenance (except by FESCO overrule, as Thorsten proposed). I think that almost everyone is agreed on this. 2. End-user expectations need to be set clearly. My own feeling is that we should set end-user expectations to the lowest common denominator; i.e. something like "legacy releases have no expectation of any updates whatsoever. Notwithstanding that, a security respose team will, within the contraints of a volunteer group, try to provide security updates to packages in reasonable timescales, prioritising as they feel is appropriate". Better to set this expectation and exceed it than set something much higher and fail. 3. On the topic of backporting security fixes, I think this is a bit of a red herring. Some have suggested NO new package versions, only backported fixes. This doesn't really make a lot of sense: what if upstream releases a new version that contains just the security fixes? Or the security fixes plus tiny bugfixes too? This is pretty common and artificially forcing someone to diff package version N and N+1, then apply the patch to version N but call it version N release++ makes no sense. Now, obviously this leaves it down to the maintainer: if we are leaving it open that they can upgrade packages as they see fit for "security" reasons, there's nothing stopping them upgrading to some big new version. But then that's the case with FE in general: a lot of it is down to trust in the maintainers not to do things that are completely out-of-line with what the Project as a whole is trying to do. Just a few thoughts anyway. Tim From pertusus at free.fr Sun Apr 30 10:24:12 2006 From: pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 12:24:12 +0200 Subject: How forbidden is RPATH? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060430102412.GA2409@free.fr> > E: rapidsvn binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/rapidsvn ['/usr/lib64'] > > I have tried absolutely everything I can think of to get rid of this. > Either it doesn't work or it breaks the build. I am really unsure, but it may come from the libtool --mode=install for rapidsvn which doesn't remove a rpath that was inserted before. There is this warning in the build log: /bin/sh ../libtool --mode=install /usr/bin/install -c 'rapidsvn' '/var/tmp/rapidsvn-0.9.1-2-root-dumas/usr/bin/rapidsvn' libtool: install: warning: `/home/dumas/RPM-fc/BUILD/rapidsvn-0.9.1/src/svncpp/libsvncpp.la' has not been installed in `/usr/lib' It may be the symptom of such an issue. It seems to me that libtool does some magic with shared libs that are part of the package at build time, ie not installed at build time. However in rapidsvn, libsvncpp doesn't appears to be a library from the package, as it is linked like a normal library with rapidsvn (with rapidsvn_LDFLAGS=-Lsvncpp, rapidsvn_LDADD= -lsvncpp). Therefore libtool don't know that svncpp is included in the package and cannot do all its magic. To check that, you can try replacing (in src/Makefile.am) rapidsvn_LDFLAGS=-Lsvncpp rapidsvn_LDADD= -lsvncpp \ $(SVN_LIBS) \ $(NEON_LIBS) \ $(APR_LIBS) \ $(WX_LIBS) rapidsvn_DEPENDENCIES=svncpp/libsvncpp.la with rapidsvn_LDADD= svncpp/libsvncpp.la \ $(SVN_LIBS) \ $(NEON_LIBS) \ $(APR_LIBS) \ $(WX_LIBS) and see if it helps (it is also more concise). It may be completly unrelated, however ;-). -- Pat From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de Sun Apr 30 11:07:51 2006 From: enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de (Enrico Scholz) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 13:07:51 +0200 Subject: How forbidden is RPATH? In-Reply-To: (Jason L. Tibbitts, III's message of "Sat, 29 Apr 2006 21:08:08 -0500") References: Message-ID: <87lktn5njs.fsf@kosh.bigo.ensc.de> tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) writes: > I'm reviewing a package (rapidsvn, > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190139) that > makes rpmlint complain: > > E: rapidsvn binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/rapidsvn ['/usr/lib64'] This will happen for every package whose upstream tarball was created with a non-RH libtool and afaik, there is no easy way to prevent it. IMO, best solution is do some dirty patching of ./configure; this is not very portable and causes a bunch of problems when people do not use AM_MAINTAINER_MODE but I do not have a general recipe for it. Perhaps something like | sed -i -e 's!sys_lib_search_path_spec=.*"!\0 /%_lib /usr/%_lib"! libtool after %configure. But this is a kind of dirty patching too. Enrico -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 480 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 30 11:54:56 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 11:54:56 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 3 - 2006-04-30 Message-ID: <20060430115456.4824.68159@rawhide.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 sqlite-tcl 2.8.16-1.i386 stripesnoop-devel 1.5-2.fc3.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-3-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- fluxbox 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 sqlite-tcl 2.8.16-1.x86_64 stripesnoop-devel 1.5-2.fc3.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: stripesnoop-devel - 1.5-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: stripesnoop = 0:1.5-2.fc3 package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: sqlite-tcl - 2.8.16-1.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: sqlite = 0:2.8.16-1 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.i386 from fedora-extras-3-i386 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc3.noarch from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: stripesnoop-devel - 1.5-2.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: stripesnoop = 0:1.5-2.fc3 package: fluxbox - 0.9.15.1-1.fc3.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: pyxdg package: sqlite-tcl - 2.8.16-1.x86_64 from fedora-extras-3-x86_64 unresolved deps: sqlite = 0:2.8.16-1 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 30 11:54:58 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 11:54:58 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras 4 - 2006-04-30 Message-ID: <20060430115458.4825.85564@rawhide.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-4-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- plague 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch scim-tables-japanese 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 scim-tables-korean 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 sylpheed-claws 2.0.0-3.fc4.x86_64 ====================================================================== package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.0.0-3.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc4.i386 from fedora-extras-4-i386 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.0.0-3.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9()(64bit) package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc4.x86_64 from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-x86_64 unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: sylpheed-claws - 2.0.0-3.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: libpisock.so.9 package: scim-tables-japanese - 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 package: plague - 0.4.4.1-1.fc4.noarch from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: createrepo >= 0:0.4.3 package: scim-tables-korean - 0.5.4-2.fc4.ppc from fedora-extras-4-ppc unresolved deps: scim-tables = 0:0.5.4 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 30 11:55:03 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 11:55:03 -0000 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-30 Message-ID: <20060430115503.4827.11016@rawhide.intranet> Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-i386: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 gnonlin-devel 0.10.0.5-6.i386 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-ppc: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc gnonlin-devel 0.10.0.5-6.ppc gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc Summary of broken packages in fedora-extras-development-x86_64: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Gtk-Perl 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 R-gnomeGUI 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 diradmin 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 gnonlin-devel 0.10.0.5-6.x86_64 gtktalog 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 sobby 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 ====================================================================== New report for: redhat AT flyn.org package: gnonlin-devel - 0.10.0.5-6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: gnonlin = 0:0.10.0.5 package: gnonlin-devel - 0.10.0.5-6.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: gnonlin = 0:0.10.0.5 package: gnonlin-devel - 0.10.0.5-6.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: gnonlin = 0:0.10.0.5 ====================================================================== package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libglade libgnomeui.so.32 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomeui.so.32 libzvt.so.2 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0 libobby-0.3.so.0 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 unresolved deps: libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libobby-0.3.so.0()(64bit) package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libgtkxmhtml.so.1()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libzvt.so.2()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.x86_64 from fedora-extras-development-x86_64 unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) gnome-libs libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libglade libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) package: diradmin - 1.7.1-4.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libgnomesupport.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: R-gnomeGUI - 2.1.0-5.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libglade-gnome.so.0 libglade libgnomeui.so.32 package: gtktalog - 1.0.4-7.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libart_lgpl.so.2 gnome-libs >= 0:1.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgnomeui.so.32 package: sobby - 0.3.0-2.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libnet6-1.2.so.0 libobby-0.3.so.0 package: Gtk-Perl - 0.7008-40.fc5.ppc from fedora-extras-development-ppc unresolved deps: libglade.so.0 libart_lgpl.so.2 libgnomesupport.so.0 libgnome.so.32 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 libgnomeui.so.32 libzvt.so.2 From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sun Apr 30 12:12:59 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 14:12:59 +0200 Subject: Unorphan: arc Message-ID: <4454A9CB.90009@hhs.nl> Hi all, I would like to unorphan arc, anybody else already working on this. any objections / remarks? Regards, Hans p.s. I'm also thinking about unorphaning monkey-bubble, but first I'm trying to get it to build (and run) with gstreamer-0.10 the version in CVS want gstreamer-0.6 upstream has a newerversion which works with gstreamer-0.8 but since upstream seems dead I would rather have it build against 0.10 . I would also like to take a look at unorphaning sirius, but that doesn't seem to be present in CVs, only in owners.list?? From bressers at redhat.com Sun Apr 30 12:56:42 2006 From: bressers at redhat.com (Josh Bressers) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 08:56:42 -0400 Subject: Security Response Team / EOL In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 30 Apr 2006 11:12:58 BST." <44548DAA.2000004@timj.co.uk> Message-ID: <200604301256.k3UCugct001761@devserv.devel.redhat.com> > > 3. On the topic of backporting security fixes, I think this is a bit of > a red herring. Some have suggested NO new package versions, only > backported fixes. This doesn't really make a lot of sense: what if > upstream releases a new version that contains just the security fixes? > Or the security fixes plus tiny bugfixes too? This is pretty common and > artificially forcing someone to diff package version N and N+1, then > apply the patch to version N but call it version N release++ makes no > sense. Now, obviously this leaves it down to the maintainer: if we are > leaving it open that they can upgrade packages as they see fit for > "security" reasons, there's nothing stopping them upgrading to some big > new version. But then that's the case with FE in general: a lot of it is > down to trust in the maintainers not to do things that are completely > out-of-line with what the Project as a whole is trying to do. > Now that things have calmed down a little bit I want to comment on this topic. There is no way you can create a policy that says ALL security fixes must be backported. It doesn't work, especially with groups of volunteers. There are other distributions that have used this policy in the past. The result ends up being if the fix is bigger than a breadbox, it just never gets fixed. The deciding factor should be which one is less invasive, and that decision should be up to the packagers and the security response team. There are times it's easier to apply a patch, there are times that one must upgrade. -- JB From gajownik at fedora.pl Sun Apr 30 13:02:31 2006 From: gajownik at fedora.pl (Dawid Gajownik) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 15:02:31 +0200 Subject: Status of yakuake In-Reply-To: <444007CB.5050006@fedora.pl> References: <444007CB.5050006@fedora.pl> Message-ID: <4454B567.8020103@fedora.pl> Dnia 04/14/2006 10:35 PM, U?ytkownik Dawid Gajownik napisa?: > When package can be considered orphaned? I'm asking about it because > yakuake is not available in FE-5. This bug ? > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=186283 is more than > 3 weeks old. I also wrote e-mail to current package maintainer 6 days > ago but I did not get any answer so far :/ > > I use this app quite often so I would be willing to take it over :) [two weeks later] No response so far... Can we mark yakuake as orphaned? Regards, Dawid -- ^_* From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Apr 30 14:30:08 2006 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 16:30:08 +0200 Subject: Summary from the last FESCO meeting Message-ID: <1146407408.2311.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> == Summary == Present from FESCo: thl, warren, f13, scop, mschwendt, jeremy, skvidal, spot * Kernel module standardization * scop> | one kmodtool/yum interop issue was found, I just committed some fixes for it * thl still wants to improve some minor things but has no time for it atm -- needs to wait * Security SIG/EOL * Updated proposal in the works; some discussions around details (see full log for details) * proposal will be posted to the list (it was actually posted to the list on friday after the meeting) * Broken deps report * skvidal and mschwendt will work on getting it to run on extras64 * the script will be imported to cvs * Weekly sponsorship nomination * tibbs (Jason L Tibbitts III) nominated himself; FESCo will discuss the nomination in the next meeting * FESCO future * we'll roughly proceed as suggested in the proposal for a elected FESCO that was posted to the list * some interesting quotes: * < warren> | The point about democracy, I'm not entirely sure we want democracy to be the top factor in governance. I mean, look at what happened to Debian. We should instead promote meritocracy. In practice, democracy tends to follow merit in a volunteer organization, so it would just happen anyway. * < mschwendt> | warren: meritocracy _and_ acceptance/approval by the community * < warren> | I think this is a little more complicated than we're thinking now, and we shouldn't lock ourselves into any long-term plan just yet. * < thl> | any plans we do can be reverted later * Members of cvsextras are eligible to vote * self-nominations to fedora-extras-list and the wiki during the first week of May and voting in the second week (if we have a solution how to actually do the vote until then; help appreciated); people that want to be in FESCo should (that's no must) lay down informations like "1) Mission Statement 2) Past work summary 3) Future plans" * Still discussions about the number of FESCo members in the future. Remains undecided, we'll look at it again when we saw the nomination results. * some minor packaging guidlines changes * modules for "erlang" and "R" shall follow the same naming scheme as python in the future * Free discussion * yum problems "Provides: and Obsoletes: to satisfy pre-extras package dependencies?" -> mschwendt will file a bug == Full Log == {{{ 19:00 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting in progress 19:00 * | thl looks around 19:00 * | warren here 19:00 < thl> | any FESCo members around? 19:01 * | scop here in a jiffy 19:01 < f13> | I'm here. 19:01 < thl> | okay, let's start slowly 19:01 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Kernel module standardization 19:02 < thl> | didn't have time for it 19:02 < thl> | it still needs some minor fixes afaics 19:02 < scop> | one kmodtool/yum interop issue was found, I just committed some fixes for it 19:02 < thl> | and I plan to reply to Axel's mail, too 19:02 < thl> | scop, k, thx 19:03 * | scop is trying hard to avoid feeding that discussion 19:03 < thl> | well, let's ignore it for now and proceed 19:03 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Security SIG 19:03 < thl> | I have a updated proposal 19:03 < thl> | and recevied some comments on the privatly 19:04 < thl> | but didn't found time yet to post it to the public list 19:04 < mschwendt> | have you posted it to fesco-list? 19:04 < thl> | do we want to wait another week to discuss this 19:04 < f13> | thl: I'm finally on fedora-extras-list so I'll see future discussion. 19:04 < thl> | mschwendt, nope, sorry 19:04 < warren> | I'd like to talk privately about the proposal 19:04 < mschwendt> | how "privately"? 19:04 < f13> | warren: planning on doing that any time soon, you know, like the last week (or 3) you were given ? 19:05 < thl> | warren, we should have at least one final round of discussion on fedora-extras-list 19:05 < warren> | I'm mostly satisfied by the current proposal. 19:05 < mschwendt> | thl: I don't find the fedora-extras-list discussion too fruitful 19:05 < warren> | mschwendt, yes. 19:05 < thl> | warren, mschwendt, that's often true 19:05 < mschwendt> | thl: it loops back to the "2nd class citizen" problem 19:06 < thl> | but I still want to show it to the public once 19:06 < thl> | before we ratify it 19:06 < warren> | how does Hans feel about the current proposal? 19:06 < warren> | the thl proposal was different from Hans 19:06 * | jeremy is here 19:06 < warren> | and I really think that everyone should really listen closely to what Bressers has to say. I feel strongly that copying Bressers' model is a good idea. 19:06 < thl> | warren, I got the impression that hans has a lot of other things to do atm 19:07 < warren> | One particular issue I'd like to discuss now. 19:07 < thl> | warren, shoot 19:08 < warren> | I don't think it is a good idea to be completely inflexible in not letting new things in. We should have a process of approval that is a HUGE hassle, but at least it is *possible*. 19:08 * | Rathann|work is away: Home. 19:08 < thl> | warren, that's in the latest proposal I wrote 19:08 < warren> | Discourage people from adding things, and generally we say no, unless there is a good reason to allow something in. 19:08 < warren> | thl, sorry, I missed that, is that the private mail version? 19:08 < thl> | warren, a "FESCO can allow exceptions" 19:08 < thl> | warren, yes, the private mail version 19:08 < warren> | OK, sounds good. 19:09 < mschwendt> | hmm, what do we discuss a secret private mail version? Who knows it? 19:09 < mschwendt> | s/what/why/ 19:09 < warren> | Let's discuss this in private and aim to post the proposal on fedora-extras-list on Monday? 19:09 * | Rathann|work is away: Home. 19:10 < thl> | mschwendt, sorry, I took this approach because it seemed the best way to driver things forward 19:10 < thl> | mschwendt, Josh, warren, and the people that showed interest in the Security SIG were in the "To:" 19:10 < f13> | warren: bressers' model is more about implimentation. The proposal was about framework. 19:10 < warren> | Do we have agreement on this basic idea? "Security team's role is mainly tracking and testing security. Maintainers are primarily resposible for fixing tracked issues. If they fail, then security team steps in." 19:11 < thl> | warren, "Monday" seems like a good idea 19:11 < warren> | thl, let's go for that. 19:11 < thl> | k 19:11 < thl> | anything else regarding EOL / Security SIG? 19:12 * | thl will move on in 15 19:12 < warren> | let's move =) 19:12 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Broken deps report 19:12 < thl> | skvidal, are you around? 19:13 < skvidal> | yes, I am now 19:13 < skvidal> | hiya! 19:13 < thl> | mschwendt, skvidal can you get this running on extras64? 19:13 < skvidal> | yep, we can do it now 19:13 < skvidal> | mschwendt: once more, I'm sorry, send me the script or check it into extras-buildsys/utils in fedora cvs 19:14 < mschwendt> | where can I learn more about "fedora cvs"? is it the same or different from Extras cvs? 19:14 < skvidal> | http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/?root=fedora 19:14 < skvidal> | right there 19:14 < skvidal> | it's the same cvs system 19:14 < skvidal> | just a different tree 19:15 < jwb> | it requires different auth too 19:15 < mschwendt> | is joining a special group in the account system needed? 19:15 < skvidal> | which I thought mschwendt had 19:15 < skvidal> | I'll check 19:15 < skvidal> | mschwendt: one sec 19:15 < jwb> | mschwendt, yes. cvsfedora 19:15 < mschwendt> | k 19:16 < skvidal> | ah, you are not in that group. sorry 19:16 < warren> | mschwendt, if you don't have access to that group, you definitely should have it. 19:16 < skvidal> | do you want to be? 19:16 < skvidal> | I can add you now, if you'd like 19:16 <-- | BobJensen has quit (Remote closed the connection) 19:16 < mschwendt> | well, if I shall keep the scripts there, yes 19:16 < skvidal> | okay doke 19:17 < skvidal> | mschwendt: done 19:17 < thl> | k, anything else regarding the scripts? 19:17 < skvidal> | you're in the group 19:17 < skvidal> | thl: we'll work out the rest in email, I suspect 19:17 < thl> | skvidal, mschwendt, tia 19:17 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Weekly sponsorship nomination 19:17 < thl> | anyone? 19:18 * | thl will move on in 15 19:18 < mschwendt> | no self-nominees? ;) 19:18 < ixs> | .oO( to be shot down in flames... ;) 19:18 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- FESCO future 19:18 < tibbs> | Crap. 19:19 < thl> | opinions on the ml-thread on fedora-extras-list? 19:19 --> | BobJensen (Robert 'Bob' Jensen) has joined #Fedora-Extras 19:19 < thl> | tibbs, any idea for a better solution? 19:19 < skvidal> | thl: I think we should progress with more-or-less your suggestion about elections. 19:19 < tibbs> | Sorry, I seem to have missed the start of this meeting. 19:20 < tibbs> | date -u is telling me it;s 17:20. 19:20 < warren> | Elections for the new members this time? 19:20 < warren> | Or are we talking about built-in timeout in FESCO membership with re-elections necessary? 19:21 < thl> | warren, I can't follow you completely 19:21 < warren> | I think nominations and election for the new FESCO members this round are a good idea. 19:21 < thl> | "built-in timeout in FESCO membership with re-elections necessary" seems like the way to go IMHO 19:21 < scop> | yes 19:21 < warren> | I don't think automatically timing people out necessitating re-election is a good idea. 19:22 < bpepple> | thl: +1 19:22 < warren> | I do support kicking people out if they haven't done anything. =) 19:22 < thl> | I would prefer if we could avoid kicking 19:22 < scop> | auto-timeout is much easier and less hassle 19:22 < warren> | The point about democracy, I'm not entirely sure we want democracy to be the top factor in governance. I mean, look at what happened to Debian. We should instead promote meritocracy. In practice, democracy tends to follow merit in a volunteer organization, so it would just happen anyway. 19:23 < thl> | warren, I'm fine with "meritocracy" 19:23 < ixs> | warren: the debian problem is not the democracy, it's the love for endless discussions. 19:23 < ixs> | and politics. 19:23 < mschwendt> | warren: meritocracy _and_ acceptance/approval by the community 19:24 < thl> | mschwendt, +1 19:24 < warren> | mschwendt, that sounds nice, but how do you codify that? 19:24 < mschwendt> | yeah, that's the hard part 19:24 < mschwendt> | we need to make FESCO work and see how the community reacts to FESCO's decisions 19:25 < thl> | warren, decisions have to be made in a meritocracy, too -- that's also a hard part 19:25 < mschwendt> | part of that will be a learning-by-doing process 19:25 * | spot agrees with mschwendt 19:25 < warren> | I think this is a little more complicated than we're thinking now, and we shouldn't lock ourselves into any long-term plan just yet. 19:25 < warren> | It would be simpler if we do a one-time election for these new members now and figure out what to do with the new leadership group. 19:25 < tibbs> | You have to be willing to try and fail and try again. 19:25 < thl> | any plans we do can be reverted later 19:26 < warren> | true 19:26 < mschwendt> | sounds good 19:26 < thl> | we just need to find a way to do it now "somehow" 19:26 < thl> | and we'll learn from the results 19:26 < warren> | one more thought along these lines 19:26 < warren> | Who is eligible to vote? 19:26 < thl> | cvsextras 19:27 < warren> | Democracies have not always created the best outcome in history. 19:27 < thl> | well, we can try something like the following 19:27 < thl> | (it was suggested on the list iirc) 19:27 < warren> | Democracy could mean someone joins without merit. 19:28 < thl> | we let people vote 7 (or 9)FESCo members 19:28 < skvidal> | warren: do you have a political science degree? 19:28 < thl> | and 6 (or 4) are elected by the old FESCo 19:28 < skvidal> | warren: history? 19:28 < skvidal> | warren: any social science at all? 19:28 < warren> | skvidal, no, but I studied it a lot. 19:28 --> | kimberly (kimberly) has joined #fedora-extras 19:29 < skvidal> | warren: trust me. given the userbase there's not much fear of a fesco dominated by people who are not qualified for the job 19:29 < warren> | Another issue, do we have agreement that we want FESCo to be larger in order to have some redundancy in membership, because not everyone attends meetings at any given time? 19:29 < warren> | I'm in support of 15 for this reason. 19:29 * | spot points out that meetings during the work week are very hard for him to attend 19:29 < mschwendt> | yes, because we need to reach a well-defined quorum 19:30 < thl> | there were a lot of people that prefered a smaller FESCo 19:30 < scop> | I still support a smaller number, like 9, and folks who are really active 19:30 < thl> | I don't want to go lower than 11 19:30 < thl> | and my vote are still 13 19:30 < warren> | I don't think there is a danger in FESCo of a larger group causing too much noise. FESCo is really about who gets things done. 19:31 < warren> | 13 or 15 is fine to me. 19:31 < warren> | If we have enough energized people who want to be there to number 15, I dont think we should deny two. 19:31 < warren> | Let's just go forward with nominations? 19:31 < tibbs> | What is the size of the voting pool? 19:31 * | warren looks... 19:32 < bpepple> | tibbs: Aren't there around a 100 or so folks in cvsextras? 19:32 < thl> | bpepple, no, there are more iirc 19:32 < mschwendt> | 238 19:32 < warren> | easy things to agree upon: We want nominations. 19:33 < bpepple> | Boy, that a bunch more than I thought. 19:33 < tibbs> | Tough to regularly find 15 people from that. 19:33 < warren> | cvsextras should vote for people who are nominatd 19:33 < thl> | warren, self-nominations imho 19:33 < warren> | ok, that's fine 19:33 < thl> | we can go for the proposed plan 19:34 < thl> | self-nominations to fedora-extras-list during the first week of May 19:34 < thl> | and voting in the second week 19:34 < warren> | thl, +1 19:34 < thl> | (if we have a solution how to actually do the vote until then) 19:34 < warren> | I move that we decide the number of spots only after we see the nomination results. 19:35 < thl> | warren, yeah, might make sense 19:35 < thl> | any "-1" for the "self-nominations to fedora-extras-list during the first week of May" solution? 19:36 < thl> | otherwise we'll go for it 19:36 < warren> | Should we suggest that nominees put information about their work and plans on their Wiki page? 19:36 < thl> | mschwendt, scop, jeremy, skvidal ? 19:36 < bpepple> | warren: That's not a bad idea. 19:36 < thl> | warren, +1 19:36 < warren> | We can have a FESCOCampaign page with links to nominee pages. 19:36 < spot> | sounds good to me. 19:36 < skvidal> | thl: announce the call for nominations to a couple of lists, too 19:36 < skvidal> | otherwise I'm down with that 19:36 < thl> | skvidal, will do 19:37 < skvidal> | oh and one more thing 19:37 < skvidal> | you do NOT have to self-nominate 19:37 < skvidal> | if someone else wants to they can nominate another person 19:37 < warren> | but you do have to accept a nomination =) 19:37 < skvidal> | but the other person has the right to decline 19:37 < skvidal> | fuck that noise 19:37 < thl> | and write a mission statement 19:37 < warren> | on each person's wiki page 19:38 * | spot goes to write a mission statement on each person's wiki page... 19:38 < thl> | skvidal, I really want to hear goals, plan from those that want to be in the next FESCO 19:38 < skvidal> | okay, that's cool 19:38 < warren> | how about... 19:38 < skvidal> | but if someone is nominated 19:38 < skvidal> | and they don't want to do it 19:38 < skvidal> | they can decline the nomination 19:38 < skvidal> | that's all I mean 19:39 < thl> | sure 19:39 < warren> | 1) Mission Statement 2) Past work summary 3) Future plans 4) links to good posts or reviews and other examples 19:39 < mschwendt> | 4? 19:39 < warren> | I don't know, just ideas. 19:39 < warren> | #4 is really the same as #2 19:40 < mschwendt> | except you don't really want anyone to look up "links" 19:40 < warren> | eh? 19:40 < mschwendt> | is bugzilla.fedora.us still alive? 19:40 < mschwendt> | are you serious about "links to good posts"? 19:41 < warren> | actually, for the moment it is still up 19:41 < warren> | the other server died 19:41 < thl> | I don't think we need to formalize the format of the "mission statement" to much 19:41 < skvidal> | thl: +1 19:41 < warren> | If you're serious about getting votes, you have the option of putting information on your wiki page. 19:42 < thl> | k, anything else? 19:42 * | thl will move on in 20 19:43 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Free discussion 19:43 < thl> | anything else releated to Extras? 19:43 < mschwendt> | The topic I started on fesco-list yesterday. 19:43 < tibbs> | I had wanted to self-nominate for sponsorship but it seems my clocks are wrong. 19:43 < mschwendt> | I really seek for more feedback from other FESCO members. 19:44 < skvidal> | mschwendt: file a bug 19:44 < tibbs> | I'll catch the next meetin for that. 19:44 < jwb> | mschwendt, what is that topic? 19:44 < warren> | skvidal, the last time a bug was filed it was closed NOTABUG, are you saying your mind changed? 19:45 < skvidal> | I'm saying i'm not sure it is the same thing at all 19:45 < warren> | skvidal, your attitude here is a bit upsetting. 19:45 < skvidal> | more importantly the rule is the same no matter what 19:45 < mschwendt> | jwb: The thread "Provides: and Obsoletes: to satisfy pre-extras package dependencies?" on extras-list is related. 19:45 < skvidal> | what attitude - he claims there is a bug or a problem 19:45 < thl> | jwb, that'S https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-April/msg01620.html 19:45 < skvidal> | he refuses to file it to get looked at 19:45 < jwb> | thank you 19:45 < warren> | If you insist this is a different issue, then he should file the bug and we'll see where this goes. 19:46 < thl> | warren, agreed 19:46 < mschwendt> | skvidal: do you accept bug reports in bugzilla.redhat.com or only upstream where I don't have an account? 19:46 < warren> | But everyone else has been under the impression that this was the same bug, if that is the case then your stance has been frustrating. 19:46 < tibbs> | I started that thread; I was just checking to make sure that it was allowable 19:46 < skvidal> | mschwendt: I have hundreds of bugs opened at rh bugzilla 19:46 < scop> | I'm pretty sure it's the same one 19:46 < skvidal> | mschwendt: feel free 19:46 < tibbs> | to include those kinds of obsoletes to cover pre-extras package history. 19:46 < skvidal> | warren: how is it that you help in this discussion? 19:46 < skvidal> | warren: scurry on your way 19:47 < warren> | skvidal, I'm pointing out that your typical attitude is demeaning towards others. 19:47 < warren> | skvidal, including this. 19:47 < skvidal> | not really 19:47 < skvidal> | just you 19:47 < skvidal> | not others 19:47 < mschwendt> | skvidal: okay, I'm going to file a bug in the next 1-2 hours 19:47 < skvidal> | mschwendt: cool 19:47 * | spot wants to propose some minor packagingguidlines changes 19:47 < scop> | mschwendt, put me in Cc, will you? 19:47 < mschwendt> | scop: yes 19:48 < skvidal> | yay, progress 19:48 < thl> | okay, I'll move on 19:48 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- spot: some minor packagingguidlines changes 19:48 < f13> | warren: um, I think you're misguided. skvidal needs a bug filed so that he can examine the issue to see if they are in fact the same issue or not. 19:48 < spot> | specifically, i want to append "erlang-*" and "R-*" to the python naming scheme 19:48 < f13> | warren: not a hard concept to understand. 19:48 < skvidal> | spot: append or prepend? 19:48 < warren> | f13, stay out of this, this isn't your problem. 19:48 < skvidal> | warren: nor is it yours 19:48 < f13> | *cough* 19:49 < spot> | skvidal: either or. add. 19:49 * | spot is pretty dosed up on cough medicine 19:49 < warren> | f13, quite frankly, I'm annoyed that you NOW join fedora-extras-list despite being on FESCO for how long? really... 19:49 < jeremy> | spot: you mean "have erlang-* and R-* follow the same" ? 19:49 < spot> | jeremy: yeah. 19:49 < spot> | same as python 19:49 < jeremy> | seems sane 19:49 < f13> | warren: I was dragged into FESCO due to Legacy, and I've been trying to get OFF fesco for a while now. 19:49 < jwb> | warren, skvidal, f13: /msg each other with bitching please 19:49 < skvidal> | spot: it makes sense from a consistency standpoint 19:49 < skvidal> | jwb: :) 19:49 < tibbs> | Stricter than python would be good 19:49 < thl> | skvidal, yeah, seems sane 19:49 < skvidal> | tibbs: stricter? 19:50 < tibbs> | Python has the "py" exception; no need for that. 19:50 < skvidal> | oh 19:50 < nirik> | spot: did you follow the elisp issue ? ( muse review )... thoughts on elisp namespace? 19:50 < thl> | s/skvidal/spot/ 19:50 < warren> | What about the emacs sub-package namespace? 19:50 < skvidal> | tibbs: you don't want erfoo :) 19:50 < jeremy> | skvidal: I want erlfoo ;) 19:50 < skvidal> | jeremy: my name is erlfoo 19:50 * | warren fought the Java namespace battle last year and lost. 19:50 < tibbs> | The initial problem was "efoo". 19:50 < tibbs> | Not a lot of uniqueness in "e". 19:50 < skvidal> | tibbs: ejabberd is an example 19:50 < skvidal> | it's not a erlang module 19:50 < skvidal> | but it is written in erlang 19:51 < tibbs> | I assume we're talking about add-on modules 19:51 * | ixs pipes up, I have ejabberd in the extras queue 19:51 < spot> | yeah, only add-on modules 19:51 < skvidal> | tibbs: okay 19:51 < tibbs> | not standalone packages that happen to be written in something. 19:51 < skvidal> | ixs: yay 19:51 < skvidal> | tibbs: okay, then I agree 19:51 < skvidal> | anyone against erlang-* and R-*? 19:51 < warren> | Add-on modules that are libraries and not applications should follow namespace guidelines. Typically the applications at the end of the chain don't. 19:52 < spot> | nirik: i'll have to look at elisp seperately. 19:52 < ixs> | skvidal: first successfull build happened yesterday. the openssl stuff was tricky. 19:52 < skvidal> | ixs: cool 19:52 < warren> | +1 Just go for erlang-* and R-* 19:52 < skvidal> | spot: sounds like a winner 19:52 < scop> | elisp needs to be emacs-* and xemacs-* in binaries due to incompatibilities with byte-compiled code 19:53 < scop> | unless the Debian way that tagoh suggested makes its way in in one form or another 19:53 < nirik> | spot: yeah, it's diffrent. I don't think it's worth doing a specific namespace for it... not enough packages, and confusing since there is emacs and xemacs to deal with. 19:53 < spot> | Other item I'd like to do is add a section to the Guidelines covering find_lang, why and how to use it. 19:53 < spot> | We've got a MUST in the reviewguidelines about it, but no text in the Guidelines 19:53 < f13> | spot: please do! 19:53 < tibbs> | Yes, I don't understand %find_lang. 19:54 < tibbs> | At least, not completely enough to tell submitters how to handle it. 19:54 < warren> | Regarding elipse, I move that scop writes a summary proposal for policy to fedora-extras-list, we discuss it, then aim for ratification next Thursday. 19:54 < warren> | elisp* 19:54 < nirik> | scop: yeah, but base packages are currently mostly %name... not emacs-%name or elisp-%name or anything. 19:55 < scop> | warren, I'd rather not 19:55 * | jwb smiles at ratification 19:55 < warren> | scop, what do you want to happen? 19:55 < scop> | no time, nor much interest here, and tagoh's approach should to be discussed first 19:55 < warren> | hmm 19:55 < tibbs> | Yes, this is a complicated issue. 19:55 < warren> | Or we could just continue to ignore the problem. 19:56 < tibbs> | We need to dissect Debian's approach to elisp packages. 19:56 * | nirik doesn't see a problem with no namespace for base packages for elisp and emacs- and xemacs- subpackages for them... 19:57 < warren> | nirik, like what happened to muse? 19:57 < spot> | well, since elisp issues aren't going to be decided now, thats all i have. 19:57 < nirik> | warren: yeah... and mew, and others already in extras. ;) 19:58 < f13> | spot: did we want to talk about a new 'governing' body over the Package Guideliens and such? 19:58 < f13> | now that more than just Extras is invovled? 19:58 < spot> | f13: i do, but lets get FESCO sorted out first. 19:58 < warren> | f13, thl, me and Max began a plan for that 19:58 < f13> | warren: oh? 19:58 < spot> | warren: yeah, thanks for CC'ing me on that btw. 19:59 < thl> | spot, I think we covered evrerything for today 19:59 < warren> | f13, we need to figure it out before posting it wider 19:59 --- | thl has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- nearly done 19:59 < warren> | spot, this began literally last night with Max pushing, I suspect he is not aware of you, don't worry you'll be included. 19:59 * | warren nudges mspevack 20:00 * | mspevack met spot at LinuxWorld. If I left him out of a thread, I apologize 20:01 < spot> | life goes on. are we about done? i need to go rest, still very sick. 20:02 < thl> | warren, spot, f13, let's get back to it another time 20:02 < warren> | thl, yes, this is in progress. 20:02 < warren> | I move that we adjourn. 20:02 < thl> | k, anything else? 20:02 < spot> | second 20:03 < warren> | pretty good, lots of ground covered in roughly an hour. 20:03 * | thl will close the meeting in 60 20:03 * | thl will close the meeting in 30 20:03 < thl> | tibbs, btw, consider yourself nominated 20:03 < thl> | tibbs, we'll discuss this next week 20:04 < tibbs> | Thanks. 20:04 * | thl will close the meeting in 10 20:04 < thl> | MARK meeting end 20:04 < tibbs> | BTW, the Wiki page says the meeting starts about now. 20:04 < warren> | tibbs, URL? 20:04 < tibbs> | http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SteeringCommittee 20:04 < tibbs> | Unless it isn't 18:05 UTC right now. }}} -- Thorsten Leemhuis From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sun Apr 30 14:28:37 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 16:28:37 +0200 Subject: Unorphan: arc In-Reply-To: <4454A9CB.90009@hhs.nl> References: <4454A9CB.90009@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1146407357.2640.3.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le dimanche 30 avril 2006 ? 14:12 +0200, Hans de Goede a ?crit : > Hi all, > > I would like to unorphan arc, anybody else already working on this. any > objections / remarks? I'm curious : is there any reason nomarch is not good enough for you ? When I had to choose between nomarch and arc for orphaning, no one stood for arc (nor, for that matter nomarch). So I decided to keep the most recent codebase in the tree. (that being said I took great pains to leave the arc package in good shape before dumping it) Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 30 15:49:05 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 17:49:05 +0200 Subject: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras development - 2006-04-30 In-Reply-To: <20060430115503.4827.11016@rawhide.intranet> References: <20060430115503.4827.11016@rawhide.intranet> Message-ID: <20060430174905.ae9469a6.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 11:55:03 -0000, Michael Schwendt wrote: > New report for: redhat AT flyn.org > > package: gnonlin-devel - 0.10.0.5-6.i386 from fedora-extras-development-i386 > unresolved deps: > gnonlin = 0:0.10.0.5 This is not bug 190116 but a packaging [or package management] mistake. If gnonlin-devel vanished without adding a corresponding Obsoletes/Provides in another package, the previously built package remains in the repository. You need to request its removal in the Wiki: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/FC6Status From tibbs at math.uh.edu Sun Apr 30 15:53:04 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 10:53:04 -0500 Subject: Best practices wrt. Changelog entries in spec file (upstream vs. specfile) In-Reply-To: <44548AA3.3020406@soeterbroek.com> (Joost Soeterbroek's message of "Sun, 30 Apr 2006 12:00:03 +0200") References: <44548AA3.3020406@soeterbroek.com> Message-ID: >>>>> "JS" == Joost Soeterbroek writes: JS> I do think it is relevant to include upstream changelog also. Generally you include the upstream changelog as %doc. I suppose it would be a good idea to include a summary of major changes in your package %changelog and it might be worth discussing whether it should be mandatory when the changes might negatively impact users, as in the case of incompatible config files changes or the like. Some people actually look at the packages before they install them. - J< From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sun Apr 30 16:09:05 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 18:09:05 +0200 Subject: Unorphan: arc In-Reply-To: <1146407357.2640.3.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> References: <4454A9CB.90009@hhs.nl> <1146407357.2640.3.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <4454E121.30900@hhs.nl> Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le dimanche 30 avril 2006 ? 14:12 +0200, Hans de Goede a ?crit : >> Hi all, >> >> I would like to unorphan arc, anybody else already working on this. any >> objections / remarks? > > I'm curious : is there any reason nomarch is not good enough for you ? I didn't know there was another tool that can read arc archives. I have this habbit to search for orphan in owners.list and see if there is anything I might concider picking up. Since I don't want Fedora users who happen to have ancient .arc archives to be left without a way to open them I thought I would pick up arc. Is nomarch cmdline compatible / could a cmdline wrapper (bash) be written? I ask because I think tools like mc will searhc for arc when trying to open a .arc no idea what nautilus will do. > When I had to choose between nomarch and arc for orphaning, no one stood > for arc (nor, for that matter nomarch). So I decided to keep the most > recent codebase in the tree. > Yes its in decent shape, although it does throw 2 warnings about using the unscure mktemp function. I think I'll patch those 2 and taken ownership of arc. Choice is always good and it doesn't seem a lott of work. If it does turn out to be more effort then its worth it it csn be orphaned again (not that I'm planning on that). Regards, Hans From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Apr 30 16:13:47 2006 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 18:13:47 +0200 Subject: Best practices wrt. Changelog entries in spec file (upstream vs. specfile) In-Reply-To: References: <44548AA3.3020406@soeterbroek.com> Message-ID: <20060430181347.3be9fbbd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 10:53:04 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>> "JS" == Joost Soeterbroek writes: > > JS> I do think it is relevant to include upstream changelog also. > > Generally you include the upstream changelog as %doc. I suppose it > would be a good idea to include a summary of major changes in your > package %changelog and it might be worth discussing whether it should > be mandatory when the changes might negatively impact users, as in the > case of incompatible config files changes or the like. Some people > actually look at the packages before they install them. You can look _into_ rpms just fine and skim over any included ChangeLog, NEWS, README files. The spec %changelog should really only cover important changes in the packaging itself. That includes comments about added/removed patches, the corresponding bugzilla ticket numbers, major rewrite-attempts of scriptlets or other spec portions (which may result in regression). If a version upgrade fixes several bugs which have been reported to you, it's added value if you mention those bug numbers, too. From tibbs at math.uh.edu Sun Apr 30 17:18:14 2006 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 12:18:14 -0500 Subject: Best practices wrt. Changelog entries in spec file (upstream vs. specfile) In-Reply-To: <20060430181347.3be9fbbd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> (Michael Schwendt's message of "Sun, 30 Apr 2006 18:13:47 +0200") References: <44548AA3.3020406@soeterbroek.com> <20060430181347.3be9fbbd.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: >>>>> "MS" == Michael Schwendt writes: MS> You can look _into_ rpms just fine and skim over any included MS> ChangeLog, NEWS, README files. Please tell us how you would do so. Assume the usual case, that the package is in a remote yum repo. Remember that we have no announcement mechanism for Extras packages, so we have no way to communicate possible incompatible updates to users. Obviously the idea is to not introduce any incompatible changes within a single Fedora release, but eventually it's going to happen and surely a sentence in the %changelog can do nothing but help. - J< From wart at kobold.org Sun Apr 30 18:14:46 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Wart) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 11:14:46 -0700 Subject: Unorphan: monkey-bubble In-Reply-To: <4454A9CB.90009@hhs.nl> References: <4454A9CB.90009@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <4454FE96.3040400@kobold.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hans de Goede wrote: > Regards, > > Hans > > p.s. > > I'm also thinking about unorphaning monkey-bubble, but first I'm trying > to get it to build (and run) with gstreamer-0.10 the version in CVS want > gstreamer-0.6 upstream has a newerversion which works with gstreamer-0.8 > but since upstream seems dead I would rather have it build against 0.10 . Michael Knox asked to take over monkey-bubble a month ago, but needed a sponsor at the time before he could do so. You might want to coordinate with him. https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg00301.html - --Mike -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEVP6VDeYlPfs40g8RAjB3AJsHhhV1Tf3NX3SPaUDlXUQWXla9pQCfYlga cC93aiz6nNo3msvVI3GPjyM= =sq2+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From michael at knox.net.nz Sun Apr 30 18:35:26 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J Knox) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 06:35:26 +1200 Subject: Unorphan: monkey-bubble In-Reply-To: <4454FE96.3040400@kobold.org> References: <4454A9CB.90009@hhs.nl> <4454FE96.3040400@kobold.org> Message-ID: <4455036E.1020203@knox.net.nz> Wart wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hans de Goede wrote: >> Regards, >> >> Hans >> >> p.s. >> >> I'm also thinking about unorphaning monkey-bubble, but first I'm trying >> to get it to build (and run) with gstreamer-0.10 the version in CVS want >> gstreamer-0.6 upstream has a newerversion which works with gstreamer-0.8 >> but since upstream seems dead I would rather have it build against 0.10 . > > Michael Knox asked to take over monkey-bubble a month ago, but needed a > sponsor at the time before he could do so. You might want to coordinate > with him. > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg00301.html > Yup and there is an updated srpm in bugzilla from me for it. I just haven't updated the owners list yet. Michael From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sun Apr 30 19:56:16 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 21:56:16 +0200 Subject: Unorphan: monkey-bubble In-Reply-To: <4455036E.1020203@knox.net.nz> References: <4454A9CB.90009@hhs.nl> <4454FE96.3040400@kobold.org> <4455036E.1020203@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <44551660.7080306@hhs.nl> Michael J Knox wrote: > Wart wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Hans de Goede wrote: >>> Regards, >>> >>> Hans >>> >>> p.s. >>> >>> I'm also thinking about unorphaning monkey-bubble, but first I'm trying >>> to get it to build (and run) with gstreamer-0.10 the version in CVS want >>> gstreamer-0.6 upstream has a newerversion which works with gstreamer-0.8 >>> but since upstream seems dead I would rather have it build against >>> 0.10 . >> >> Michael Knox asked to take over monkey-bubble a month ago, but needed a >> sponsor at the time before he could do so. You might want to coordinate >> with him. >> >> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg00301.html >> >> > > Yup and there is an updated srpm in bugzilla from me for it. I just > haven't updated the owners list yet. > Ah luckily you didn't put too much work in it, so my work is not in vain. For example you didn't fix the icon being put in the wrong place, nor did you fix the scripts to properly handle the gconf schemas as described in the wiki. Also you fixed the compile by removing the -Werror, whereas I have just finished a patch which fixes it by fixing the warnings. Also your srpm seems based on gstreamer-0.8 where we now have gstreamer-0.10. I've another patch which massages monkey-bubble into using gstreamer-0.10 because I don't want to unorphan something while it is using a compat-lib. Michael, besides not updating owners.list you also didn't import it into CVS, otherwise I would have based my work on your version. Anyways I'm almost done bringing this fully up to spec (pun intended), after I'm done with that I'll import my version into CVS (since that one is IMHO clearly better). After this the remainging question is, who's name are we going to put in owners.list? Do you want to maintain it including my move to gstreamer-0.10 massaging, or shall I? Regards, Hans From michael at knox.net.nz Sun Apr 30 20:05:35 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 08:05:35 +1200 Subject: Unorphan: monkey-bubble In-Reply-To: <44551660.7080306@hhs.nl> References: <4454A9CB.90009@hhs.nl> <4454FE96.3040400@kobold.org> <4455036E.1020203@knox.net.nz> <44551660.7080306@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <4455188F.6080300@knox.net.nz> Hans de Goede wrote: > > Michael J Knox wrote: >> Wart wrote: >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA1 >>> >>> Hans de Goede wrote: >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Hans >>>> >>>> p.s. >>>> >>>> I'm also thinking about unorphaning monkey-bubble, but first I'm trying >>>> to get it to build (and run) with gstreamer-0.10 the version in CVS want >>>> gstreamer-0.6 upstream has a newerversion which works with gstreamer-0.8 >>>> but since upstream seems dead I would rather have it build against >>>> 0.10 . >>> Michael Knox asked to take over monkey-bubble a month ago, but needed a >>> sponsor at the time before he could do so. You might want to coordinate >>> with him. >>> >>> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg00301.html >>> >>> >> Yup and there is an updated srpm in bugzilla from me for it. I just >> haven't updated the owners list yet. >> > > Ah luckily you didn't put too much work in it, so my work is not in > vain. For example you didn't fix the icon being put in the wrong place, > nor did you fix the scripts to properly handle the gconf schemas as > described in the wiki. Also you fixed the compile by removing the > -Werror, whereas I have just finished a patch which fixes it by fixing > the warnings. Also your srpm seems based on gstreamer-0.8 where we now > have gstreamer-0.10. I've another patch which massages monkey-bubble > into using gstreamer-0.10 because I don't want to unorphan something > while it is using a compat-lib. > > Michael, besides not updating owners.list you also didn't import it into > CVS, otherwise I would have based my work on your version. Anyways I'm > almost done bringing this fully up to spec (pun intended), after I'm > done with that I'll import my version into CVS (since that one is IMHO > clearly better). After this the remainging question is, who's name are > we going to put in owners.list? Do you want to maintain it including my > move to gstreamer-0.10 massaging, or shall I? > > Regards, > > Hans > I have been busy working with the developers (of monkey-bubble) fixing bugs, check the gnome cvs log to see. I have begun work on porting it too gstreamer-0.10, but due to University getting in the way of my hacking, I have not progressed far. gstreamer-0.8 is still in FE as it is needed for other applications, gnomebaker comes to mind, so I do not think its a shop stopper that it is still using 0.8. The fixed srpm I have on my HDD at home is made witha snap shot from the cvs tree, as many fixes have been made to monkey-bubble. The srpm in bugzilla was a naive fix up. Also, it was not imported into cvs as I only got sponsored about 2 weeks ago and at the time of making that srpm, I was not sponsored. I would prefer to continue with monkey-bubble, but if you feel different, then we can discuss this off list. Michael From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sun Apr 30 20:18:14 2006 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 22:18:14 +0200 Subject: Unorphan: arc In-Reply-To: <4454E121.30900@hhs.nl> References: <4454A9CB.90009@hhs.nl> <1146407357.2640.3.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <4454E121.30900@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <1146428335.2640.32.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le dimanche 30 avril 2006 ? 18:09 +0200, Hans de Goede a ?crit : > > Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > When I had to choose between nomarch and arc for orphaning, no one stood > > for arc (nor, for that matter nomarch). So I decided to keep the most > > recent codebase in the tree. > > > > Yes its in decent shape, although it does throw 2 warnings about using > the unscure mktemp function. I think I'll patch those 2 and taken > ownership of arc. Choice is always good and it doesn't seem a lott of > work. If it does turn out to be more effort then its worth it it csn be > orphaned again (not that I'm planning on that). arc still got an upstream which is responsive - you can forward patches to them, they'll release new versions. since arc is taken care of, may I drop nomarch? -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sun Apr 30 20:32:56 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 22:32:56 +0200 Subject: Unorphan: monkey-bubble In-Reply-To: <4455188F.6080300@knox.net.nz> References: <4454A9CB.90009@hhs.nl> <4454FE96.3040400@kobold.org> <4455036E.1020203@knox.net.nz> <44551660.7080306@hhs.nl> <4455188F.6080300@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <44551EF8.7070300@hhs.nl> Michael J. Knox wrote: > Hans de Goede wrote: >> >> Michael J Knox wrote: >>> Wart wrote: >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>> Hash: SHA1 >>>> >>>> Hans de Goede wrote: >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Hans >>>>> >>>>> p.s. >>>>> >>>>> I'm also thinking about unorphaning monkey-bubble, but first I'm >>>>> trying >>>>> to get it to build (and run) with gstreamer-0.10 the version in CVS >>>>> want >>>>> gstreamer-0.6 upstream has a newerversion which works with >>>>> gstreamer-0.8 >>>>> but since upstream seems dead I would rather have it build against >>>>> 0.10 . >>>> Michael Knox asked to take over monkey-bubble a month ago, but needed a >>>> sponsor at the time before he could do so. You might want to >>>> coordinate >>>> with him. >>>> >>>> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg00301.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Yup and there is an updated srpm in bugzilla from me for it. I just >>> haven't updated the owners list yet. >>> >> >> Ah luckily you didn't put too much work in it, so my work is not in >> vain. For example you didn't fix the icon being put in the wrong place, >> nor did you fix the scripts to properly handle the gconf schemas as >> described in the wiki. Also you fixed the compile by removing the >> -Werror, whereas I have just finished a patch which fixes it by fixing >> the warnings. Also your srpm seems based on gstreamer-0.8 where we now >> have gstreamer-0.10. I've another patch which massages monkey-bubble >> into using gstreamer-0.10 because I don't want to unorphan something >> while it is using a compat-lib. >> >> Michael, besides not updating owners.list you also didn't import it into >> CVS, otherwise I would have based my work on your version. Anyways I'm >> almost done bringing this fully up to spec (pun intended), after I'm >> done with that I'll import my version into CVS (since that one is IMHO >> clearly better). After this the remainging question is, who's name are >> we going to put in owners.list? Do you want to maintain it including my >> move to gstreamer-0.10 massaging, or shall I? >> >> Regards, >> >> Hans >> > > I have been busy working with the developers (of monkey-bubble) fixing > bugs, check the gnome cvs log to see. > > I have begun work on porting it too gstreamer-0.10, but due to > University getting in the way of my hacking, I have not progressed far. > > gstreamer-0.8 is still in FE as it is needed for other applications, > gnomebaker comes to mind, so I do not think its a shop stopper that it > is still using 0.8. > > The fixed srpm I have on my HDD at home is made witha snap shot from the > cvs tree, as many fixes have been made to monkey-bubble. The srpm in > bugzilla was a naive fix up. > > Also, it was not imported into cvs as I only got sponsored about 2 weeks > ago and at the time of making that srpm, I was not sponsored. > > I would prefer to continue with monkey-bubble, but if you feel > different, then we can discuss this off list. > If you want todo monkey-bubble and even have contact with upstream thats great! Plenty of other stuff for me to package / spend time on. It was just that I've been spending some hours on monkey-bubble today and after seeing the spec linked to from bugzilla I thought it would be a good idea to update CVS to my version instead of yours, as I already tried to say you would have been free to pick up from there. I understand now that you have a much newer SRPM hidden somewhere :) So I'm fine with you unorphaning and maintaining monkey-bubble, but I don't want my work to be lost. I'll send you a private mail with my specfile for 0.3.2 and the 2 patches I have. The gstreamer patch very probably will only apply against 0.3.2, after that you can in essence copy src/audio/sound-manager.c to your current monkey-bubble tree as that file is for 60-70% new after the patch. About the specfile, please take a look at the installation of the icon and all the %post and %pre scripts these contain correct handling of the GConf schemas, the icon and scrollkeeper! I've just finished my second iteration of the gstreamer-0.10 patch and it works (yeah!). Regards, Hans From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sun Apr 30 20:33:47 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 22:33:47 +0200 Subject: Unorphan: arc In-Reply-To: <1146428335.2640.32.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> References: <4454A9CB.90009@hhs.nl> <1146407357.2640.3.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <4454E121.30900@hhs.nl> <1146428335.2640.32.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <44551F2B.40300@hhs.nl> Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le dimanche 30 avril 2006 ? 18:09 +0200, Hans de Goede a ?crit : >> Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > >>> When I had to choose between nomarch and arc for orphaning, no one stood >>> for arc (nor, for that matter nomarch). So I decided to keep the most >>> recent codebase in the tree. >>> >> Yes its in decent shape, although it does throw 2 warnings about using >> the unscure mktemp function. I think I'll patch those 2 and taken >> ownership of arc. Choice is always good and it doesn't seem a lott of >> work. If it does turn out to be more effort then its worth it it csn be >> orphaned again (not that I'm planning on that). > > arc still got an upstream which is responsive - you can forward patches > to them, they'll release new versions. > > since arc is taken care of, may I drop nomarch? > Erm, the idea was to lower the count of orphans, but you're a free man and its a free world. Regards, Hans From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sun Apr 30 20:38:16 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 22:38:16 +0200 Subject: Unorphan: monkey-bubble In-Reply-To: <4455188F.6080300@knox.net.nz> References: <4454A9CB.90009@hhs.nl> <4454FE96.3040400@kobold.org> <4455036E.1020203@knox.net.nz> <44551660.7080306@hhs.nl> <4455188F.6080300@knox.net.nz> Message-ID: <44552038.6080507@hhs.nl> p.s. Michael, I just realised I forgot to say this in my previous mail: Sorry about the misunderstanding. Oh and a request. I believe that you posted a long list with stuff you wanted to unorphan recently? I don't remember of monkey-bubble was on it but it probably was, can you update owners.list with and take ownership of all the packages you plan to unorphan? That way we can avoid future problems. Also it would be nice if you could remove monkey-bubble from the orphans list on the games SIG wiki page. Regards, Hans From michael at knox.net.nz Sun Apr 30 20:48:00 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 08:48:00 +1200 Subject: Unorphan: monkey-bubble In-Reply-To: <44552038.6080507@hhs.nl> References: <4454A9CB.90009@hhs.nl> <4454FE96.3040400@kobold.org> <4455036E.1020203@knox.net.nz> <44551660.7080306@hhs.nl> <4455188F.6080300@knox.net.nz> <44552038.6080507@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <44552280.6010401@knox.net.nz> Hans de Goede wrote: > Oh and a request. I believe that you posted a long list with stuff you > wanted to unorphan recently? I don't remember of monkey-bubble was on it > but it probably was, can you update owners.list with and take ownership > of all the packages you plan to unorphan? That way we can avoid future > problems. Also it would be nice if you could remove monkey-bubble from > the orphans list on the games SIG wiki page. I have been as I have updated the packages. No point claiming ownership of something that is not worth maintaining.. Hence my attempt to define "retired" packages. Michael From toshio at tiki-lounge.com Sun Apr 30 20:51:42 2006 From: toshio at tiki-lounge.com (Toshio Kuratomi) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 13:51:42 -0700 Subject: How forbidden is RPATH? In-Reply-To: <20060430103935.934f28f1.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1146377314.3878.8.camel@localhost> <20060430103935.934f28f1.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1146430302.3878.40.camel@localhost> On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 10:39 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 23:08:33 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > lpthread -ldl /usr/lib64/libaprutil-1.so -lldap -llber /usr/lib64/libdb-4.3.so /usr/lib64/libexpat.so -Wl,--rpath -Wl,/usr/lib64 > > > > It's being added into the link line by libtool. Here's how to get rid > > of it:: > > make LIBTOOL=/usr/bin/libtool > > > > I've updated the wiki page to reflect that this may sometimes be the > > best way to pass the LIBTOOL line into the build. > > Actually, it's quite the opposite. It's a crude hack, which > may result in unexpected side-effects when the other generated > libtool/automake files become too different from the enforced > /usr/bin/libtool > Yes -- a poor choice of words on my part. Best as in "it works when other things fail" not best as in "best practice". I think my update of the wiki was okay, though. Page in question: http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/RpathCheckBuildsys One thing... I haven't checked any of the other packages that require setting LIBTOOL so I don't know if the first recomendation "export LIBTOOL=libtool" is extraneous or not. -Toshio -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From mike at flyn.org Sun Apr 30 20:56:35 2006 From: mike at flyn.org (W. Michael Petullo) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 15:56:35 -0500 Subject: Orphaned: pam_mount, a PAM module that can mount volumes for a user session Message-ID: <20060430205635.GA2516@imp.flyn.org> I have chosen to stop maintaining the pam_mount package in Fedora Extras because: 1. I am no longer the upstream maintainer 2. I no longer use the package myself Therefore, pam_mount is now orphaned. I sincerely hope that an appropriate individual becomes interested in maintaining pam_mount. The module has been very useful to me in the past. The bug documented at: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174190 is the only issue I am aware of affecting pam_mount. -- Mike :wq From wart at kobold.org Sun Apr 30 21:14:32 2006 From: wart at kobold.org (Wart) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 14:14:32 -0700 Subject: optional game music files Message-ID: <445528B8.6020807@kobold.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I recently reviewed a request for raidem-music: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190267 This package contains background music (ogg format) for the game raidem. The music is not required to play the game, and is not part of the upstream sources, but was written for the game. The packaging guidelines state: # Game levels are not considered content, since games without levels would be non functional. # Sound or graphics included with the source tarball that the program or theme uses (or the documentation uses) are acceptable. but also say: Some examples of content which are not permissable: * Ogg/mp3 files Since these ogg files are part of the game, but not part of the upstream sources, are they still considered acceptable? - --Mike -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEVSi3DeYlPfs40g8RAovxAJ0W5+hKxScBMW1sZfNR8g8dIWXh8ACfSF+9 qcWN8QtK7oJ/2vl9wazfh+o= =TMk8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From michael at knox.net.nz Sun Apr 30 21:22:35 2006 From: michael at knox.net.nz (Michael J. Knox) Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 09:22:35 +1200 Subject: Unorphan: monkey-bubble In-Reply-To: <44551EF8.7070300@hhs.nl> References: <4454A9CB.90009@hhs.nl> <4454FE96.3040400@kobold.org> <4455036E.1020203@knox.net.nz> <44551660.7080306@hhs.nl> <4455188F.6080300@knox.net.nz> <44551EF8.7070300@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <44552A9B.3040605@knox.net.nz> Hans de Goede wrote: > If you want todo monkey-bubble and even have contact with upstream thats > great! Plenty of other stuff for me to package / spend time on. It was > just that I've been spending some hours on monkey-bubble today and after > seeing the spec linked to from bugzilla I thought it would be a good > idea to update CVS to my version instead of yours, as I already tried to > say you would have been free to pick up from there. I understand now > that you have a much newer SRPM hidden somewhere :) > > So I'm fine with you unorphaning and maintaining monkey-bubble, but I > don't want my work to be lost. I'll send you a private mail with my > specfile for 0.3.2 and the 2 patches I have. > > The gstreamer patch very probably will only apply against 0.3.2, after > that you can in essence copy src/audio/sound-manager.c to your current > monkey-bubble tree as that file is for 60-70% new after the patch. > > About the specfile, please take a look at the installation of the icon > and all the %post and %pre scripts these contain correct handling of the > GConf schemas, the icon and scrollkeeper! > > I've just finished my second iteration of the gstreamer-0.10 patch and > it works (yeah!). Resolved, Hans is the proud owner of monkey-bubble :-) With me focusing on upstream. Michael From mpeters at mac.com Sun Apr 30 21:22:38 2006 From: mpeters at mac.com (Michael A. Peters) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 14:22:38 -0700 Subject: Major Update and User Config Message-ID: <1146432158.20070.85.camel@atlantis.mpeters.local> As most of you are probably aware, pan is rising from the dead. I have the 0.9x series in rawhide (it's not ready yet for general consumption) and am using it myself on FC5 - and even though it is rough in a few spots, it is much faster and better overall. There is one issue - the user configuration format has drastically changed, and upstream doesn't want to write code to migrate the user settings. So an update will result in loss of all settings, including subscribed newsgroups and filters and even the users newsgroup connection settings. Are there policies about putting those kinds of updates into non devel repos? On the one hand - anyone using current pan who isn't aware that this will happen will lose all of their settings, on the other hand - that is going to happen with an upgrade to FC6 anyway - and (once pan releases stable) the sooner the new version gets in, the less people will install the old the pan and spend time setting it up just to have to do it again. And the new pan really is light years ahead of the old pan. My preference as packager would be to bite the bullet, and a week or so after the new stable release (watching the pan user list for potential problems) push it into both fc4 and fc5 - but if the lack of configuration thing is a major problem, perhaps that shouldn't be done. Opinions? From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sun Apr 30 21:22:59 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 23:22:59 +0200 Subject: cvs-import.sh problem (somewhat urgent) Message-ID: <44552AB3.80609@hhs.nl> Hi, A couple of minutes ago I started the import of raidem-music, see: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190267 (Yes I know the approved has been revoked, but that was after I started the import) But thats not the problem, the problem is that cvs-import has decided to drop a couple of large .ogg files into CVS instead of the lookaside cache, should I abort the import with CTRL-C or? Regards, Hans From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sun Apr 30 21:24:17 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 23:24:17 +0200 Subject: cvs-import.sh problem (somewhat urgent) In-Reply-To: <44552AB3.80609@hhs.nl> References: <44552AB3.80609@hhs.nl> Message-ID: <44552B01.1000104@hhs.nl> Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > A couple of minutes ago I started the import of raidem-music, see: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190267 > > (Yes I know the approved has been revoked, but that was after I started > the import) > > But thats not the problem, the problem is that cvs-import has decided to > drop a couple of large .ogg files into CVS instead of the lookaside > cache, should I abort the import with CTRL-C or? > Darn, to late how do I (we) fix this? cvs rm -f, cvs commit make new-sources FILES= ? Regards, Hans From j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl Sun Apr 30 21:26:43 2006 From: j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl (Hans de Goede) Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 23:26:43 +0200 Subject: optional game music files In-Reply-To: <445528B8.6020807@kobold.org> References: <445528B8.6020807@kobold.org> Message-ID: <44552B93.1060100@hhs.nl> Wart wrote: > I recently reviewed a request for raidem-music: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190267 > > This package contains background music (ogg format) for the game raidem. > The music is not required to play the game, and is not part of the > upstream sources, but was written for the game. > That is AFAIK not entirely correct, the music is not written for the game but selected by the game author as _the_ background music, its a seperate optional download because of size issues, but it is linked from the games main download page. > The packaging guidelines state: > > # Game levels are not considered content, since games without levels > would be non functional. > # Sound or graphics included with the source tarball that the program or > theme uses (or the documentation uses) are acceptable. > > but also say: > > Some examples of content which are not permissable: > > * Ogg/mp3 files > > Since these ogg files are part of the game, but not part of the upstream > sources, are they still considered acceptable? > Quoting myself from bugzilla: I think you're reading this to literal, the .ogg files in this package are linked to from the download page of upstream: http://home.exetel.com.au/tjaden/raidem/download.html They are not some randomly picked ogg files, they are _the_ background music for raidem. Don't tell me that I have to ask upstream to make a special tarball for me with these included because the guidelines say so? About the explicit saying that mp3 and ogg files are not acceptable, I believe this is to discourage people from packaging stand alone collections of music and is not a hard forbidden item, otherwise monkey-bubble and gcompris would have to have all their ogg's removed leaving them severely crippled. Regards, Hans